TalkLeft Discussion Forums

State v. George Zimmerman (Pre-Trial) => Evidence Discussion => Topic started by: RickyJim on July 09, 2012, 09:07:40 AM

Title: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on July 09, 2012, 09:07:40 AM
At his first interview on the night of the 26th, Zimmerman claimed he fell down and was mounted right after Martin's sucker punch.  During the walkthrough, his gestures indicate there was movement southward before he fell down.  Also, witnesses heard shouting from 2 or more people before the yelling for help started.  The shouts seemed to migrate from the T to John's lawn.  Zimmerman has not included an account of what the shouts were about, AFAIK.  Does anybody remember him being asked about that?  Was there an opportunity for him to diffuse the situation by identifying himself before he was on the ground being pummeled?  The evidence from the witnesses to the shouting and the fact that he wants to give the impression that he and Martin exchanged one sentence a piece at the T, raises suspicions.  Could a prosecution argument be based on it?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 09, 2012, 09:16:01 AM
At his first interview on the night of the 26th, Zimmerman claimed he fell down and was mounted right after Martin's sucker punch.  During the walkthrough, his gestures indicate there was movement southward before he fell down.  Also, witnesses heard shouting from 2 or more people before the yelling for help started.  The shouts seemed to migrate from the T to John's lawn.  Zimmerman has not included an account of what the shouts were about, AFAIK.  Does anybody remember him being asked about that?  Was there an opportunity for him to diffuse the situation by identifying himself before he was on the ground being pummeled?   The evidence from the witnesses to the shouting and the fact that he wants to give the impression that he and Martin exchanged one sentence a piece at the T, raises suspicions.  Could a prosecution argument be based on it?

Why do you assume that identifying himself would diffuse the situation?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on July 09, 2012, 09:29:27 AM
Why do you assume that identifying himself would diffuse the situation?

It might not have diffused the situation.  I find the fact that Zimmerman didn't claim to have tried, noteworthy.  I think Serino was tending towards this argument in his Capias, as part of the case for negligent homicide.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on July 09, 2012, 09:31:31 AM
I honestly don't recall Z saying he fell right where he was struck and TM was mounted on top of him instantaneously. I agree he didn't elaborate on the actual movements that occurred the night of the event, but I wouldn't equate lack of details that night as proof that the details of the reenactment are fabricated.

The witnesses that describe the shouting/arguing starting at the T, talk of it being a brief exchange and then a period of silence (from a few seconds up to 10 minutes from one witness).  The other witnesses that talk about the second round of shouting could very well be referring to the screams for help.  The 911 call captures the shout out of screams for help and some witnesses identify that the words are help and others just say more generically that its people shouting.

I guess its possible Z could have diffused the situation, but one would have to make some assumptions.  If the story Z is telling is true (TM surprised him out of the dark coming at him) he probably figured saying he was a neighborhood watch person wasn't going to change TM's intentions and I doubt it was the first thing that came to mind (I'm guessing that was more like oh crap, I thought he was gone, now I need some help).  Others have said that if he had just said he called police and they are on the way, then TM would not have attacked.  I guess my answer to that would be that John said he was going to call 911 and there doesn't appear to be any indication that this caused TM to stop his assault so I'm not sure its a valid thought.  Not sure its worth spending much time on as Z didn't identify himself and it doesn't matter either way to his self defense claim.  The fact that Serino referenced this in his capias is just another indication why its prosecutors that make the final decision on whether to charge and not policemen.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 09, 2012, 09:32:08 AM
The shouts seemed to migrate from the T to John's lawn.

Who said that? My recollection is that the shouts changed to 'scuffling' before the source of the sounds moved.

Quote
Zimmerman has not included an account of what the shouts were about, AFAIK.

Zimmerman didn't comment on the volume of the words exchanged between himself and Martin, and he wasn't asked about it.

W-11 thought she heard three shouts, but she wasn't sure. It's possible that only one of them was shouting, and the other went unheard.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on July 09, 2012, 09:43:36 AM
Jeralyn went over the evidence that the shouts migrated in a post on the Debris Field thread.  Here is a transcript of the relevant portion of Zimmerman's interview with Singleton on the first night.  Notice that in this version he "fell backwards".
Quote
Zimmerman: “So I was walking back through to where my car was and he jumped out from the bushes and he said ‘What the f*ck’s your problem homey?’ And I got out my cellphone out to call 911 this time. And I say, ‘Hey man, I don’t have a problem,’ and he goes ‘Now you have a problem.’ And he punched me in the nose. At that point I fell down, I tried to defend myself. He just started punching me in the face. And, uh, I started screaming for help, I couldn’t see, I couldn’t breathe. Then he started taking my head…”

Investigator: “And you’re still standing at this point?”

Zimmerman: “No ma’am, I fell to the ground when he punched me the first time. It was dark, I didn’t even see him getting ready to punch me. As soon as he punched me I fell backwards into the grass. And then he grabbed me and he was whaling on my head, and then I started yelling help. when i started yelling help, He grabbed my head and he started to hit my head into the — I tried to sit up and yell for help and then he grabbed my head and started hitting it into the sidewalk. When he started doing that I, I slid into the grass to try and get out from under him, and so he would stop hitting my head into the sidewalk, I was still yelling for help. I could see people looking and some guy yells out ‘I’m calling 911′ and I said ‘help me, help me, he’s killing me,’ and he puts his hand on my nose and on my mouth and he says your going to die tonight and I, I don’t remember much after that. I just remember I couldn’t breathe and then he still kept trying to hit my head against the pavement, or, I don’t know if it was a sign or what it was, so I just… when I slid my jacket and my shirt came up and when he said your… I felt his hand go down on my side and I thought he was going for my firearm so I grabbed it immediately and as he banged my head again I just pulled out my firearm and shot him.”
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 09, 2012, 09:44:32 AM
I honestly don't recall Z saying he fell right where he was struck and TM was mounted on top of him instantaneously.

In the first interview he said he fell 'as soon as' he was punched (2/26-1, 14:07-11).

In the second part of that interview, going over the events again, he said he didn't know where he 'ended up' after the punch (2/26-2, 6:47-52).

Quote
The witnesses that describe the shouting/arguing starting at the T, talk of it being a brief exchange and then a period of silence (from a few seconds up to 10 minutes from one witness).

W-18 said that. W-11 and W-20 I'm sure did not. I don't recall what W-12 and W-13 said about that.
 
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 09, 2012, 09:54:31 AM
Jeralyn went over the evidence that the shouts migrated in a post on the Debris Field thread.

You mean this? (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2030.msg95496.html#msg95496)

The word 'shout' appears nowhere in that post. The words are 'noise' and 'sounds'.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on July 09, 2012, 10:11:27 AM
You mean this? (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2030.msg95496.html#msg95496)

The word 'shout' appears nowhere in that post. The words are 'noise' and 'sounds'.
;D  OK, your assignment is to listen to all the witnesses mentioned and report back exactly what words they used to describe the sounds.  Didn't one describe one voice as more dominant than the other?  Did anybody use screams to describe the noise at this point.  Am I wrong in thinking that the sounds only turned to screams when they reached John's lawn?  Am I the only one here bothered by Zimmerman leaving out what he said between "I don't have a problem" and "Help"?  Will the prosecution argue that all he did was curse and threaten Martin instead of explaining his business?  Can you imagine Zimmerman leaving out anything he did that would cast him in a good light?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: dragon ash on July 09, 2012, 10:52:42 AM
Why do you assume that identifying himself would diffuse the situation?
It might not have. Or it might have. We'll never know, will we? Because George never tried.

Obviously just a WAG, but one could surmise that if he says 'I'm with the neighborhood watch, everything OK'? or something like that, from Martin's point of view "the creepy guy that's been following me around in a car for the last couple of minutes and is now out of the car chasing after me" becomes "concerned citizen just making sure everything's ok", and maybe the talk baskeball for a few minutes before heading to their respective destinations.

Obviously that's pure specuation.

Anyone know if the Neighborhood Watch had rules & guidelines drawn up? I lived in a community with a very similar program many years ago. Everyone had maps, relevant phone numbers, and four or five guidelines on a laminated card handed out to patrolers. In addition to a small map of the particular area that person was patrolling, the card had emergency contact info and a reminder of what to say and do when confronting someone. The two key guidelines were 1) key responsibility was to observe and report; let LEOs do the arrests and such, and 2) identify yourself by name and association (Hi, I'm John with the NH, is everything OK).

If nothing else I hope NH programs start implementing these guidelines if they haven't already.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on July 09, 2012, 11:03:42 AM
In the first interview he said he fell 'as soon as' he was punched (2/26-1, 14:07-11).

In the second part of that interview, going over the events again, he said he didn't know where he 'ended up' after the punch (2/26-2, 6:47-52).

My interpretation of that sequence was that he was saying he was felled by one punch, not that he was stating that he went straight down like a ton of bricks.  The quote from the second part of the interview as well as other recollections that he fell/stumbled backwards seems to contradict the idea that he fell straight down where he was punched.

[/quote]W-18 said that. W-11 and W-20 I'm sure did not. I don't recall what W-12 and W-13 said about that.
[/quote]

My recollection from W-11 and W-20 (same household) was that they heard arguing (causing them to mute TV), then a period of no yelling, but only scuffling or oooh's and aaah's, then screaming for help as the scuffling moved south.  I didn't intend to imply they didn't hear anything between the arguing and yelling, but others commented on hearing arguing, then a period of no yelling and then yelling again (screams for help).  Others only reported hearing the second yelling (screams for help)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 09, 2012, 11:09:21 AM
It might not have. Or it might have. We'll never know, will we? Because George never tried.


Sorry, I don't know what GZ tried. How do you?

We do know  from his description,that he was not afforded the luxury of polite conversation.
We can also speculate that given the tenor of TM's question that GZ  could expect tat identifying himself might cause further aggression.

 Why would TM launch a punch because someone replied that I don't have a problem'? My guess is that Martin's opening challenge were part of the bravado of a pre-planned assault.


Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: TalkLeft on July 09, 2012, 11:13:07 AM
Whether Zimmerman could have defused the situation is in my opinion a red herring advanced by Serino and the State. Florida law does not impose duty to avoid danger.  See McWhorter v State (http://cdn.talkleft.com/zimm/mcwhortynodutytoavoid.pdf):

Quote
In this case, the trial court properly granted appellant's request for self-defense instructions, based on appellant's testimony that he was first attacked by Archibald and that he struck Archibald to retaliate and prevent further harm to himself. Appellant contends, however, that the trial court incorrectly instructed the jury on self-defense by telling them that appellant had to try to "avoid the danger" before using force. According to appellant, this instruction negated his defense.

....the revised standard jury instructions for justifiable use of deadly force, which were approved by the Florida Supreme Court in May 2006....Standard Jury Instruction 3.6(f): Justifiable Use of Deadly Force omit the "necessity to avoid" language...

....[T]he trial court's jury instructions misstated the current law applicable to self-defense. The "necessity to avoid" language would lead the jury to believe that the appellant had  to use "every reasonable means within his power to avoid the danger" before he could resort to the use of force likely to cause great bodily harm. However, under section 776.013, a person who is attacked is allowed to stand his
or her ground and "meet force with force." It appears that the new law places no duty on the person to avoid or retreat from danger, so long as that person is not engaged in an unlawful activity and is located in a place where he or she has a right to be. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. (2005). Because the jury instructions misstated the law governing appellant's sole affirmative defense of self defense, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Prior to 2006, there was such a duty. The old, now discarded instruction read:

Quote
The defendant cannot justify the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless [he][she] used every reasonable means within [his][her] power and consistent with [his][her] own safety to avoid the danger before resorting to that force.

If Zimmerman was punched by Martin without having provoked Martin's use of force against him, Stand Your Ground applies and he had no duty to defuse the situation. So discussing what he could have done to diffuse the situation goes nowhere unless he provoked Martin's used of force against him. And as endlessly discussed here in other threads,  to find he provoked Martin and was the aggressor, his actions would have had to contemporaneously provoke Martin's use of force. It's not enough to provoke fear unless the fear is of imminent bodily injury. Following someone and demanding they account for their presence, or asking what they are doing in a certain place, do not reasonably provoke the fear of  the imminent use of physical force. There's no evidence or suggestion that Zimmerman issued a verbal threat of force  and as I've said before, you can only speculate here when your theories and suggestions have some factual support in the discovery released by the parties.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 09, 2012, 11:14:31 AM
;D  OK, your assignment is to listen to all the witnesses mentioned and report back exactly what words they used to describe the sounds.  Didn't one describe one voice as more dominant than the other?  Did anybody use screams to describe the noise at this point.  Am I wrong in thinking that the sounds only turned to screams when they reached John's lawn?  Am I the only one here bothered by Zimmerman leaving out what he said between "I don't have a problem" and "Help"?  Will the prosecution argue that all he did was curse and threaten Martin instead of explaining his business? Can you imagine Zimmerman leaving out anything he did that would cast him in a good light?

 Can you imagine the prosecution leaving out evidence of Zimmerman swearing at Martin? Cause I sure don't see it in what out there.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 09, 2012, 11:38:37 AM
It might not have diffused the situation.  I find the fact that Zimmerman didn't claim to have tried, noteworthy.  I think Serino was tending towards this argument in his Capias, as part of the case for negligent homicide.

I know Jeralyn hates this wandering from the topic, but if Zimmerman had just hung a left into Frank's driveway as soon as he saw Martin, then someone who was what he suspected Martin was would have rabbited back out the unfenced gap to the west, and Martin not being that would have wondered why that guy turned into the drive so fast but at least the truck's off the street so he could cross RVC without getting run over in the rain and proceeded on his way to get under shelter waiting for the rain to ease up. 

Zimmerman, seeing someone acting like they had a right to be there would have had to re-evaluate.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: dragon ash on July 09, 2012, 12:09:06 PM
Whether Zimmerman could have defused the situation is in my opinion a red herring advanced by Serino and the State. Florida law does not impose duty to avoid danger.  See McWhorter v State:

Interesting - does this apply to only when the 'danger situation' has started, or does it apply in the lead-up to the situation? It obviously seems a bit unrealistic to expect someone to try and have a polite conversation with the person that's busy trying to hit them over the head with a baseball bat or something. I don't think I'm explaining this very well, but what I'm asking is, does the law say that George (and possibly Martin?) had a responsibility to 'avoid' the danger by defusing the situation before it developed?

You can only speculate here when your theories and suggestions have some factual support in the discovery released by the parties.
When George reaches into his pocket (to pull out his phone to dial 911), Martin thinks "sh**, this guy that's been following me around the last few minutes in his car, then got out of his car to chase after me, is now reaching for his gun!". Decides he can't outrun a bullet but thinks he might disarm George before he draws. Rest unfolds as already discussed

Under this scenario George would (rightly) be found innocent, I think?




Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on July 09, 2012, 05:00:51 PM
Whether Zimmerman could have defused the situation is in my opinion a red herring advanced by Serino and the State. Florida law does not impose duty to avoid danger.  See McWhorter v State (http://cdn.talkleft.com/zimm/mcwhortynodutytoavoid.pdf):

Prior to 2006, there was such a duty. The old, now discarded instruction read:

If Zimmerman was punched by Martin without having provoked Martin's use of force against him, Stand Your Ground applies and he had no duty to defuse the situation. So discussing what he could have done to diffuse the situation goes nowhere unless he provoked Martin's used of force against him. And as endlessly discussed here in other threads,  to find he provoked Martin and was the aggressor, his actions would have had to contemporaneously provoke Martin's use of force. It's not enough to provoke fear unless the fear is of imminent bodily injury. Following someone and demanding they account for their presence, or asking what they are doing in a certain place, do not reasonably provoke the fear of  the imminent use of physical force. There's no evidence or suggestion that Zimmerman issued a verbal threat of force  and as I've said before, you can only speculate here when your theories and suggestions have some factual support in the discovery released by the parties.

The only evidence that Zimmerman issued a verbal threat of force is that loud arguing was heard by some witnesses and Zimmerman never mentioned it.  Of course that is rather weak evidence without somebody who heard exactly what was said.  If the prosecution is in such a hopeless situation, it is quite natural to speculate on why they keep trying so hard and risk a possible civil suit.  But knowing what is good for me, I won't.   :-X 
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 09, 2012, 06:57:09 PM
The only evidence that Zimmerman issued a verbal threat of force is that loud arguing was heard by some witnesses and Zimmerman never mentioned it.  Of course that is rather weak evidence without somebody who heard exactly what was said.  If the prosecution is in such a hopeless situation, it is quite natural to speculate on why they keep trying so hard and risk a possible civil suit.  But knowing what is good for me, I won't.   :-X

Unless they've been sitting on some absolutely nuclear weapons grade bombshell evidence, I don't think there's any speculation involved in why, at this point,  they keep trying.

They've burned their bridges behind themselves.  After all the Zimmermans have been put through they can't just go "Ooops, our bad, never mind".

The speculation (again, barring a bombshell) would be about why they went down this road in the first place.

We can't go there, but can we give consideration to the question of what happens to whom politically if this all blows up in the face of the state?

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 09, 2012, 08:15:44 PM
Interesting - does this apply to only when the 'danger situation' has started, or does it apply in the lead-up to the situation? (...)
what I'm asking is, does the law say that George (and possibly Martin?) had a responsibility to 'avoid' the danger by defusing the situation before it developed?
When George reaches into his pocket (to pull out his phone to dial 911), Martin thinks "sh**, this guy that's been following me around the last few minutes in his car, then got out of his car to chase after me, is now reaching for his gun!". Decides he can't outrun a bullet but thinks he might disarm George before he draws. Rest unfolds as already discussed

Under this scenario George would (rightly) be found innocent, I think?

As I understand SYG, in your hypothetical situation, yes GZ merely has to be in fear of his life or of great bodily injury.

Quote
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she]
had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force
with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death
or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony

Even if Zimmerman had a magic diffuse the the situation button he was not obligated to use it.
The perception of danger is loosely constrained

 
Quote
In deciding whether the defendant was justified in the use of non-deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by
the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the
defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of non-deadly force, the appearance of danger
must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have
believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the
defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.

and the hammer.(for Jurors) Its a bit tougher in a SYG hearing.

Quote
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether
the defendant was justified in the use of non-deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty.

So if your unsure of the previous two issue - maybe your not sure who started the fight, or perhaps Zimmerman should not perceive that he was in danger of  - you must acquit
Title: W-11, Sound And Movement
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 10, 2012, 02:55:58 AM

W-11 to SPD, 3/2: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-2tTr2gEGg&feature=related)

0:32-52:
Quote
It sounded just like - we had the TV kind of loud - but it sounded just like two or more men talking kind of loud. And so I muted the TV, to see what was going on. And at that point it kind of just sounded like scuffling around. So, that's when I kinda went to just get the phone . . .

1:07-23:
Quote
While I was calling, the scuffling kinda turned to like a, one man was yelling, kinda like a "heah, heah," not a "help" yell, but just yelling. And so, then those yells kinda turned to "help, help, help." And at that point I was already on the phone with nine one one.


7:04-16:
Quote
It sounded like it all started right on the sidewalk by our house there. And then, maybe like it bent the corner, and right there is where the scuffle started, and sort of scooted down.

During the SPD interview, Serino and Singleton seemed to be showing W-11 some kind of illustration (7:32-8:10). She indicated two possible locations for where the sounds started. It's not clear if they marked the locations.

W-11 to FDLE, 3/19: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjxKigT2teQ&feature=relmfu)

1:36-2:05:
Quote
It was pitch black out though, but we could hear, or I could hear, kind of like someone, yelling or loud talking. Kind of sounded like two, three, maybe, a group of guys. But we couldn't really tell. So I muted the TV. And then, the talking stopped, and it was more like a scuffling, across the grass and pavement there.

2:09-21:
Quote
So, as I'm getting on the phone with 911, we kinda start hearing a yelling. But you, it's not words yet. It's more just like a 'heah, heah' kind of a yell.  And then, while I'm on the phone, it turns into 'help's.

W-11 is a very precise witness, like W-6.

She divided the time from the start of the sounds to the gunshot into four periods. First there was 'yelling or loud talking', by an uncertain number of men. Then there was 'scuffling', without vocalization. Then one man was yelling an unintelligible monosyllable that might have been 'help!' Then there were definite cries for help.

In the SPD interview, W-11 seemed to be saying the yelling started north of her home. The source of the sound moved, and 'bent the corner', before the yelling gave way to 'scuffling.'

In the FDLE interview, W-11 seemed to say the source of the sound began moving at the same time the yelling changed to scuffling.

The FDLE interview matches the reenactment, if we identify the conversation Zimmerman recalled with the 'yelling or loud talking'. Zimmerman didn't comment on the volume of the exchange, and wasn't asked about it.

The earlier SPD interview has two possible discrepancies, compared with the reenactment. It seems to put the beginning of the encounter significantly farther west, and it seems to have the encounter moving south and east before the yelling gave way to scuffling.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: willisnewton on July 10, 2012, 04:19:58 PM
here is a quick summary of GZ's statements about how the fight started. 

BTW, as far as I know NOTHING happened at the T.  There's no evidence that GZ did anything but pass it once, headed east with a busted flashlight and a distracted attention from talking to the dispatcher.  On his return we don't know if he went that way or not, do we? 

first interview   26 FEB part one
 
"I fell to the ground when he punched me the first time"

"as soon as he punched me i fell backwards into the grass."

"and he punched me in the nose. At that point, I fell down…"



and thats when he slugged you

 he just hit me

WHAT DID HE SAY before that?

you got  problem homie

he said now you have a problem

Singleton: He struck you in the nose first?
GZ: Yes m'am
S: And thats what knocked you down?
GZ: Yes m'am




part two

S: where do you end up when you guys are on the ground and after all this has happened?

"he punched me in the face, and i fell backwards and i don't even know where i ended up"

you just know you are somewhere in this area?
yes m'am




Audio Recorded Interview with Investigator Serino of Sanford Police Department on February 27 (12:05 AM)
(this is where Serino tries to take him thru it all fast, seemingly intentionally so GZ can't think about the answers too much.)

GZ:and then he punched me in the face

CS: he punched, you fell?

GZ: yes sir


----------

stress test account

(partial transcript from my own notes, sorry)

and i went to go for my phone instinctively
and call 911
jacket pocket
and i reached and i was looking

and he just punched me in the nose,
and i fell backwards and to my side, and he ended up

-------
video reenactment
Zimmerman...When I got to ...I passed here, (he's looking down from the "T" I looked, I didn't see anything again and I was walking back to my truck and then when I got to right about here, (he's past the "T') he yelled from behind me to the side, he said, Yo, you got a problem, and I turned around and I said, no, I don't have a problem, man

Investigator...where was he at, about
Zimmerman...he was about there, but he was walking towards me
Investigator...So he was coming from this direction here (investigator is motioning with his arm back to front, back being the direction of Brandy's townhouse while standing a little way down on the sidewalk)
Zimmerman....Yes, sir. Like I said I was already past that so I didn't see exactly where he came from but he was about where...(tape cut out again a bit) And I said I don't have a problem and I went to go grab my cell phone but my.... I left it in a different pocket. I went...I looked down at my pant pocket and he said, you got a problem now and then he was here (motions that he was right there next to him) and he punched me in the face
Investigator...right here (investigator moves up to the sidewalk away from the "t")
Zimmerman...right up around here, to be honest I don't remember exactly
Investigator....that's fine
Zimmerman... I think... I stumbled, and I fell down he pushed me down, somehow he got on top of me
Investigator...on the grass or on the cement?

Zimmerman: It was more over towards here (Zimmerman walks down into the dog path) I was trying to push hime away from me and then he got on top of me somewhere around here (he looks around) and, ah, that's where I started screaming for help.
---------
first interview of three after re-enactment
not mentioned

second after reenactment
not mentioned specifically

third
not mentioned specifically

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: JW on July 10, 2012, 05:35:29 PM
here is a quick summary of GZ's statements about how the fight started. 

BTW, as far as I know NOTHING happened at the T.

Witness 11 claims to have heard the struggle begin near the "T" and move south behind her townhome.
That backs up GZ's account. Not only that but at one point witness 11 claims to have heard 3 exchanges before the scuffle. GZ claims TM spoke first, he answered him and TM spoke again before the struggle. Dee on the other hand claims to hear only two exchanges before the struggle began. TM:"Why you following me for?" GZ: "What are you doing around here?" Then the phone falls. So that is a contradiction in Dee's story.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: willisnewton on July 10, 2012, 07:23:05 PM
Witness 11 claims to have heard the struggle begin near the "T" and move south behind her townhome.
That backs up GZ's account. Not only that but at one point witness 11 claims to have heard 3 exchanges before the scuffle. GZ claims TM spoke first, he answered him and TM spoke again before the struggle. Dee on the other hand claims to hear only two exchanges before the struggle began. TM:"Why you following me for?" GZ: "What are you doing around here?" Then the phone falls. So that is a contradiction in Dee's story.

That's what I mean...  NEAR the T.  The lighted keychain flashlight was found NEAR the T, south on the dogwalk path.  GZ claims TM cut across before the T and struck him on the sidewalk that is the cut thru. Then, in opposition to his many statements about falling  Nothing happened ON or AT the T. 

The difficulty is that no one saw it.  So we have GZ's version and we have the dropped objects in different places.  And GZ's accounts aren't always reliable. 

As for the exchanges, again we will never know, but the exact meaning of three exchanges is unclear to me.  Is an exchange a question and answer, or does that count as two of the three? 

GZ claims a short dialog, although he varies it a bit.  DeeDee has her recollection.  I always wonder if there isn't  a middle ground, and the dialog wasn't more like this:

TM:You got a problem?
GZ: No I don't have a problem.
TM: Why are you following me?
GZ: What are you doing here? 
TM: Why are you following me?
GZ: What are you doing here?

That, to me is "three exchanges." 

I'm curious who closed the gap.  Two persons got close enough to eventually be on the ground together, that much was witnessed.  Who closed the gap?  The objects lead in a trail towards TM's home.  GZ claims TM closed the gap.  We just don't know.  To me that leaves us with George's credibility as the best measure of what happened.  Either he tells the truth about how the fight started or he doesn't. 

Now, in a court of law the prosecution has the burden of proof to provide to a jury evidence that George is guilty.  They claim they can do it, and they claim to have witnesses to a foot chase.  We'll see.  Maybe as soon as Thursday, even. 





Title: Three exchanges
Post by: Kyreth on July 10, 2012, 08:08:31 PM
Except w11 describes what she meant by three exchanges, as one person saying something, then the other, then the first.  Just like George described.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on July 10, 2012, 09:53:52 PM
And just like Dee Dee described albeit with different words.
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: RickyJim on July 11, 2012, 06:42:21 AM
Except w11 describes what she meant by three exchanges, as one person saying something, then the other, then the first.  Just like George described.

Neither DeeDee nor Zimmerman describes the exchanges as loud or angry.  I get the impression that the witnesses heard things that happened after the original few words, after DeeDee lost the connection and Zimmerman has conveniently omitted from his accounts.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 07:10:43 AM
I don't recall anyone asking George  Z about any loud out crys ( except the cries for help)
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 11, 2012, 07:13:51 AM
Neither DeeDee nor Zimmerman describes the exchanges as loud or angry.

Dee Dee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfVTM8sqz4k&feature=relmfu) explicitly said the strange man sounded 'kinda angry.' (13:41-14:07)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: dragon ash on July 11, 2012, 07:21:22 AM
Dee Dee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfVTM8sqz4k&feature=relmfu) explicitly said the strange man sounded 'kinda angry.' (13:41-14:07)
Unfortunately DeeDee's account is about as reliable as one of those wristwatches you buy from the guy at the corner of 8th Ave. and 42nd St., when the watch stops running long before the guy that sold it to you does. It's impossible to figure out how much of what she says is her and how much is the detective 'interviewing' here (and I say that as someone that is not generally on Zimmerman's side of things).
Title: Back And Forth
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 11, 2012, 07:35:46 AM
Not only that but at one point witness 11 claims to have heard 3 exchanges before the scuffle.

Serino's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-2tTr2gEGg&feature=related) question was actually 'How many back and forths did you hear, as far as the yelling, could you approximate?' (2:13)

I would guess either 'three exchanges' or 'three back and forths' to more likely mean six utterances than three. But I'd rather not guess. W-11 made clear that she meant three utterances.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 08:53:27 AM

I'm curious who closed the gap.  Two persons got close enough to eventually be on the ground together, that much was witnessed.  Who closed the gap?  The objects lead in a trail towards TM's home.  GZ claims TM closed the gap.  We just don't know.  To me that leaves us with George's credibility as the best measure of what happened.  Either he tells the truth about how the fight started or he doesn't. 

Now, in a court of law the prosecution has the burden of proof to provide to a jury evidence that George is guilty.  They claim they can do it, and they claim to have witnesses to a foot chase.  We'll see.  Maybe as soon as Thursday, even.


Actually GZ will never prove he is credible to some hard core spectators particularly those with an ax to grind.
However  the enormous leap of faith he made to describe distinguishable physical acts before he had access to any other testimony should  be given a lot of weight by honest jurors.

Isn't it possible that we have already seen the prosecutions evidence of a foot chase?

So you think DeeDee's enhanced blow by blow description, constructed by her aural analysis of pre-echos is in the next discovery release?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: amateur on July 11, 2012, 09:03:04 AM
The biggest issue with the movement of the fight is that it moves in the direction of retreat for TM, IMO.  GZ describes it in the video as both "I was defending myself" and "I was trying to push him off me" but for the fight to move down TM's path that means TM had to have been moving backward and GZ forward, assuming they really did meet at the T.

A question I've not seen answered is where was GZ's large flashlight? It was found on the ground nearer to the body.  Was it in his hand the whole time or in a pocket?
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: leftwig on July 11, 2012, 09:18:21 AM
Neither DeeDee nor Zimmerman describes the exchanges as loud or angry.  I get the impression that the witnesses heard things that happened after the original few words, after DeeDee lost the connection and Zimmerman has conveniently omitted from his accounts.

Just my opinion, but I imagine Z's reference to TM saying "you got a problem with me homie" and reaching for his phone implies that he believed TM was angry and didn't want to chat.  I'd also assume that "well you do now" followed by a punch to the face has an implication of anger as well.  Fair enough that we don't know if Z's statements are true, but I think he is certainly conveying that TM angrily confronted him. 

Dee Dee agrees with the three utterances.  W11 agrees with the three utterances and I believe she said that one was more pronounced then a softer, then a louder again. 
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 09:24:36 AM
Just my opinion, but I imagine Z's reference to TM saying "you got a problem with me homie" and reaching for his phone implies that he believed TM was angry and didn't want to chat.  I'd also assume that "well you do now" followed by a punch to the face has an implication of anger as well.  Fair enough that we don't know if Z's statements are true, but I think he is certainly conveying that TM angrily confronted him. 

Dee Dee agrees with the three utterances.  W11 agrees with the three utterances and I believe she said that one was more pronounced then a softer, then a louder again.

Doesn't anyone think that W11 had any reason at that point to be tallying sentence structures in an  indistinguishable conversation . Why should we take her recollections as anything more than an estimate.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 09:26:27 AM
The biggest issue with the movement of the fight is that it moves in the direction of retreat for TM, IMO.  GZ describes it in the video as both "I was defending myself" and "I was trying to push him off me" but for the fight to move down TM's path that means TM had to have been moving backward and GZ forward, assuming they really did meet at the T.

A question I've not seen answered is where was GZ's large flashlight? It was found on the ground nearer to the body.  Was it in his hand the whole time or in a pocket?

Don't you think the direction of retreat is defined by the location of the assailant?
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 11, 2012, 09:32:23 AM
W11 agrees with the three utterances and I believe she said that one was more pronounced then a softer, then a louder again.

In what statement did she say that?

I think you may be confusing W-11 with W-18.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Mary2012 on July 11, 2012, 10:06:38 AM
I honestly don't recall Z saying he fell right where he was struck and TM was mounted on top of him instantaneously. ...

GZ also has it in his written statement (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/06/21/written_statement_0226.pdf) starting at the bottom of page 2 and it continues on page 3.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 10:12:02 AM
Of course he subsequently expanded and corrected his statement without prompting.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 11, 2012, 10:30:49 AM
Don't you think the direction of retreat is defined by the location of the assailant?

If Trayvon went out of his way to come at George from the north for whatever reason some are determined to believe caused him to do so, then south is one of the 3 cardinal directions available to him to retreat, and if that first alleged blow had a great enough impact, George might not even be aware in which of those 3 directions he was moving, only that it was "away".

However, if George goes at Trayvon from the north, then that same southerly path is an option open to Trayvon as well.

So the direction of the retreat doesn't necessarily establish who was doing the retreating.
That's all assuming the assailant comes at the other party from the north.

But if the assailant comes at the other party from the south, then south is not my first guess as to what the direction of retreat will be.

So an attack from the north seems more probable.

In order for the attacker to have been Trayvon, he's got to get north of Zimmerman to attack from the north, presumably without George noticing until it's too late to escape that first blow.

Why Martin would feel compelled to attack face to face instead of utilizing the element of surprise to attack from behind I do not understand.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 10:39:04 AM

Why Martin would feel compelled to attack face to face instead of utilizing the element of surprise to attack from behind I do not understand.


Probably for the same reason he confronted TM verbally.

Why would he swing to the north - plenty of reasons  - cut off GM ? Light in his eyes? Get more leverage into a punch?

But you can easily sidle around an opponent who is reaching in his pocket  during the length of the reported conversation with seconds  to spare.



Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: JW on July 11, 2012, 10:45:34 AM
Probably for the same reason he confronted TM verbally.

Why would he swing to the north - plenty of reasons  - cut off GM ? Light in his eyes? Get more leverage into a punch?

But you can easily sidle around an opponent who is reaching in his pocket  during the length of the reported conversation with seconds  to spare.

Not to mention Martin was on the phone with his "girlfriend". I'm sure he was trying to impress.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on July 11, 2012, 10:49:56 AM
GZ also has it in his written statement (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/06/21/written_statement_0226.pdf) starting at the bottom of page 2 and it continues on page 3.

Don't see where that statement says he fell straight to the ground where he was punched.  Fell back and ended up on his back is what it says.  While I understand this doesn't say the punched dazed him as he stumbled back and fell to the ground, it also doesn't say he fell straight down as if he were knocked out by the punch.  Also, just for the sake of comparison, look at some of the other written statements from witnesses that night.  They leave out a ton of detail (except for the one who documented every single thing she did), maybe because the didn't want to write it all down and stuck to just the things they thought were important.  I'd guess Z felt it was important to relay that he was punched in the face and it knocked him down and he ended up on his back.  Any more detail than that probably didn't seem to matter at that time.

To the other point, yes, I have the witness numbers mixed up.   One witness mentioned the dominant voice and it not being the one yelling for help and another had the 3 utterances.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: dragon ash on July 11, 2012, 11:53:58 AM
In his very first interview the night of the shooting, when things should be clearest in his head, he's very clear - he says it twice: He was punched, and fell back in to the grass, from the first punch. The statement says, he punched me, and I fell backwards on to my back. It can't be any more clear, and it's nowhere near the same as 'punched, knocked off balance, stumbled down the path, fell down, Martin ended up on top of me'.

The first time he changes his story is at the re-enactment, when he seems to realize that 'sh*t, I can't get knocked down here, 'cause the kid's body ended up down there'. So he says he 'doesn't remember, thinks he tried to push Martin off him, etc'.

Quote
Not to mention Martin was on the phone with his "girlfriend". I'm sure he was trying to impress.
::) Right, because so much of Martins' conversation up to that point clearly was aimed at trying to impress. Like DeeDee would be impressed at his ninja-like movements that she totally could see over the phone. My eyes can't roll back far enough in my head. Seriously.

Quote
Probably for the same reason he confronted TM verbally.

Why would he swing to the north - plenty of reasons  - cut off GM ? Light in his eyes? Get more leverage into a punch?

But you can easily sidle around an opponent who is reaching in his pocket  during the length of the reported conversation with seconds to spare
While I'm at it:  ::)   ::)   ::)

And George was so unconcerned with this big bad suspicious, drugged/armed dude showing up behind him, and he gets so engrossed with the phone, that he looks down and completely ignores Maratin long enough for Martin to close the distance, get behind him, hen wait a bit more for George to turn around again and be facing Martin, so he can punch him in the nose.

Because obviously hitting George from behind in the dark with no warning whatsoever isn't nearly as smart of move as first calling attention to yourself, then trying to move almost 180 degrees around the subject and waiting for them to turn back towards you, 'cause clearly George will be blinded by the light from the headlines of his truck that is parked 150 feet DOWNHILL from the T. And 'cause when George is reaching into his pockets, he could, you know, never be reaching for a gun, he'd never be armed. Yeah, I'm sure that's what Martin was thinking. He clearly had this all planned out.

I swear, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: IgnatiusJDonnelly on July 11, 2012, 12:00:37 PM
I was banned from the TH for this sort of talk. :D
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: AJ on July 11, 2012, 12:30:56 PM
::) Right, because so much of Martins' conversation up to that point clearly was aimed at trying to impress. ... My eyes can't roll back far enough in my head. Seriously.

And my eyes are rolling too. Are you speculating here or have you spoken with this witness and asked her "what was said in those multiple 'couple minutes' where apparently nothing was happening?"
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: dragon ash on July 11, 2012, 04:26:23 PM
And my eyes are rolling too. Are you speculating here or have you spoken with this witness and asked her "what was said in those multiple 'couple minutes' where apparently nothing was happening?"
I take all statements as evidence as it is, and assume the simplest, most direct explanation possible absent  evidence suggesting something else. Assuming that Martin must have been 'trying to impress his girlfriend' on the phone and using that as a reason to surmise that Martin be behind George, talk to him, wait for him to look down and fumble for his phone, move around him, wait for George to again turn back around, -then- punch him in the nose is silly. The simplest, most obvious thing to do would be to hit George from behind as he walked to his car.

Any scenario that has Martin punching George -has- to account for the fact that George himself says that Martin didn't take advantage of the element of surprise when he easily could have.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 11, 2012, 04:32:55 PM
I take all statements as evidence as it is, and assume the simplest, most direct explanation possible absent  evidence suggesting something else. Assuming that Martin must have been 'trying to impress his girlfriend' on the phone and using that as a reason to surmise that Martin be behind George, talk to him, wait for him to look down and fumble for his phone, move around him, wait for George to again turn back around, -then- punch him in the nose is silly. The simplest, most obvious thing to do would be to hit George from behind as he walked to his car.

Any scenario that has Martin punching George -has- to account for the fact that George himself says that Martin didn't take advantage of the element of surprise when he easily could have.

Except that - your mix of speculation and conjecture followed by a non sequitur are not compelling.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: JW on July 11, 2012, 04:44:02 PM
And my eyes are rolling too. Are you speculating here or have you spoken with this witness and asked her "what was said in those multiple 'couple minutes' where apparently nothing was happening?"

No kidding. GZ's account of the confrontation sounds more realistic. How many fights start after 2 sentences spoken that aren't really that angry. Sounds completely made up to me.
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: TalkLeft on July 11, 2012, 11:51:31 PM
Dee Dee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfVTM8sqz4k&feature=relmfu) explicitly said the strange man sounded 'kinda angry.' (13:41-14:07)

DeeDee also said he had a deep voice, and she dropped her's in tone to match. GZ doesn't have a deep voice.

Dee Dee should not be considered a "witness". She wasn't there. There is no way to corroborate what she claims weeks later, after all the press coverage. That she doesn't come forward until Crump talks her and her mother into giving him an exclusive interview (he then laughably characterizes as an oral affidavit) and then offers her up to the state is reason enough to discount anything she says.

Who would trust Dee Dee in a matter of importance to them? She is the personification of reasonable doubt.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DarkSkiesRbest on July 12, 2012, 12:16:39 AM
Whether you believe DeeDee's version of the brief exchange or George's, neither justified physical force.
Title: Re: Three exchanges
Post by: DebFrmHell on July 12, 2012, 12:17:54 AM
DeeDee also said he had a deep voice, and she dropped her's in tone to match. GZ doesn't have a deep voice.

Dee Dee should not be considered a "witness". She wasn't there. There is no way to corroborate what she claims weeks later, after all the press coverage. That she doesn't come forward until Crump talks her and her mother into giving him an exclusive interview (he then laughably characterizes as an oral affidavit) and then offers her up to the state is reason enough to discount anything she says.

Who would trust Dee Dee in a matter of importance to them? She is the personification of reasonable doubt.

And yet, I think the State of Florida has put a lot of their eggs in her basket.
Title: What Dee Dee Heard at the "T"
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 12, 2012, 12:53:33 AM
Dee Dee, (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/20/cnr.03.html) as told by Crump on March 20:
Quote
He says, I'm not going to run. I'm going to walk fast. At that point, she says Trayvon -- she hears Trayvon say, why are you following me. She hears the other boy say, what are you doing around here. And again, Trayvon says, why are you following me. And that's when she says again he said, what are you doing around here. Trayvon is pushed. The reason she concludes, because his voice changes like something interrupted his speech. Then the other thing, she believes the earplug fell out of his ear. She can hear faint noises but no longer has the contact. She hears an altercation going and she says, then suddenly, somebody must have hit the phone and it went out because that's the last she hears.

Note 'again', making it explicit that each one repeated his line, for a total of four utterances.

Martin's 'walk fast' reply is missing from the de la Rionda interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfVTM8sqz4k&feature=relmfu) of April 3.

In this version, each speaker said his line once (10:36-11:11):
Quote
Why are you following me for?/What are you doing around here?

Then was bumping, and the sound of grass (11:23-42).

11:48-54:
Quote
Dee Dee: And then, next thing I hear, the next thing, the phone just shut off.

De la Rionda: The phone shut off?

Dee Dee: It shut off.

De la Rionda: OK.


12:10-48:
Quote
De la Rionda: So the last thing you heard was some kind of noise like-

Dee Dee: Yeah.

De la Rionda: -something hitting somebody?

Dee Dee: Yeah.

De la Rionda: OK. And, when you heard that noise, something hitting somebody, you did, did you hear the man say anything, or did you hear Trayvon say anything? 

Dee Dee: I can hear a little bit.

De la Rionda: OK. What could you hear?

Dee Dee: I could of just hear, like, like, it's like, the headphones, because of the headphones, he might got off.

De la Rionda: OK.

Dee Dee: But I could still hear a little bit, like.

De la Rionda: OK. What could you hear?

Dee Dee: Like a little "Get off," some stuff.

De la Rionda: You heard "Get off"?

Dee Dee: Like a little "Get off." [crosstalk]

Dee Dee and de la Rionda went a few rounds establishing that she was hearing Martin's voice (12:48-59).

13:00-12:
Quote
De la Rionda: And he was saying what now?

Dee Dee: Like "Get off."

De la Rionda: "Get off"?

Dee Dee: Yeah.

De la Rionda: Is that clear that you were hearing that, or you think you heard that?

Dee Dee: Yeah, I could hear it.

De la Rionda: OK.

Dee Dee: A little bit. It's "Get off, get off." Then the phone just, hung up.

De la Rionda: OK. Alright.

The bump was the last thing she heard, so whatever sound the grass made, and 'get off' (once or twice), must have been simultaneous with the bump. I think it's odd that Martin would say 'Get off' at the very moment he was bumped.

In Crump's version, after Martin was 'pushed', Dee Dee could hear 'faint noises' and 'an altercation'. Crump said Dee Dee thought Martin was pushed because 'his voice changes'. He didn't mention Dee Dee hearing a bump.

We have three versions of the conversation Dee Dee heard:
Quote
Why are you following me?/What are you doing around here?/Why are you following me?/What are you doing around here?

Why are you following me for?/What are you doing around here?/Get off.

Why are you following me for?/What are you doing around here?/Get off, get off.


Title: The Conversation at the "T"
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 12, 2012, 07:59:22 AM
Zimmerman:
Quote
What the f*'s your problem, homie?/Hey man, I don't have a problem./No, now you have a problem.  [2/26-1, 13:29]

You got a problem, homie?/I don't have a problem./Now you have a problem. [2/26-1, 22:36]

You got a problem[?]/No./You do now. [2/26W]

You got a problem?/No./You have a problem now. [2/27S, 2:56]

Yo, you got a problem?/Naw, I don't have a problem, man./You got a problem now. [2/27R, 7:28. After answering a question, GZ repeated his own line without 'man.']

You got a problem? [2/27V, 30:28, 6:49:05]/No, I don't have a problem. [38:24, 6:57:01]

Dee Dee: (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2052.msg96001.html#new)

Quote
Why are you following me?/What are you doing around here?/Why are you following me?/What are you doing around here?

Why are you following me for?/What are you doing around here?/Get off.

Why are you following me for?/What are you doing around here?/Get off, get off.

Does W-11, the neutral arbiter, give us grounds for choosing between Zimmerman and Dee Dee?

W-18 suggests a longer conversation than any of the other witnesses. I won't discuss her further here.

None of the other witnesses heard anything they recognized as conversation.

W-11 to SPD, 2/2, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-2tTr2gEGg&feature=related) 1:57-2:06:
Quote
Serino: OK. The conversations that you heard, the yelling before you muted the TV. Could you make out anything that was being said?

W-11: I really couldn't. It was just kinda loud yelling.

2:13-32:
Quote
Serino: How many back and forths did you hear, as far as the yelling, could you approximate?

W-11: I would say maybe three, and I would be kind of just guessing. Like, it would sound like maybe one person said something, someone said something back, and then he said something.

Serino: Something like "Hey!""Hey!""Hey!" Three?

W-11: Maybe, yeah.

Serino: OK.

W-11: But, again, the TV was on, and that was before I muted it.

6:28-36:
Quote
W-11: It just sounded like "Hey! Hey!", not "hey" even, but it was just, you know, yelling, like "'What are you doing?' 'What are you [unintelligible]?'" Kind of like that.

W-11's statement to FDLE/SAO didn't add anything regarding the conversation.

W-11's three utterances match Zimmerman, with the technical exception that he once omitted the third. They also match the two versions Dee Dee gave de la Rionda. They don't quite match Crump's version of Dee Dee's account, which has four utterances.

W-11's '"What are you doing?" "What are you [unintelligible]?"' is closer to Dee Dee's versions than Zimmerman's. In some of Zimmerman's versions, though not the earliest ones, he has only 'No' for the second utterance.

W-11 emphasized her uncertainty. She was 'just guessing' at the number of utterances. She 'really couldn't' make out any words.

Bottom line, I don't think W-11 has given us grounds to say that either Zimmerman or Dee Dee are closer to describing the truth of the conversation.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on July 12, 2012, 08:18:43 AM
Good analysis and I agree that W11 isn't going to help either side on the content of the initial exchange.  I think the best she does is provide a location of where that exchange took place and maybe the tone of the voices.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on July 19, 2012, 08:18:46 AM
I was reading the transcript that Lee M prepared and it struck me that if, and that is a HUGE IF, Trayvon Martin didn't get close to the Green Townhouse and then double back but chose to hide close to the "T" he could have most certainly heard at least some of the conversation that Zimmerman was having with the dispatch.  Especially, if GZ remained at the dog station for a brief amount of time banging his larger flashlight trying to make it work.

I still don't understand how TM could be out of breath from just running around the corner.  I don't understand how after a couple of minutes he ended up basically from where he "lost" GZ.  I have thought that he had to have gone farther down the dog walk then returned.  I still can't assign the lay-in-wait tag to him but this does make me curious.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: IgnatiusJDonnelly on July 19, 2012, 08:47:47 AM
Not a huge if. It was Serino's opinion that TM did not run skip  far.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 19, 2012, 10:34:18 AM
It has been suggested elsewhere that perhaps Martin dropped or otherwise lost the tan bag and beverage can at some point and returned to retrieve it.

That could possibly account for doubling back from the area of the Green residence to the area of the "T" and possibly account for the can being separated from the bag.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on July 19, 2012, 10:47:09 AM
It has been suggested elsewhere that perhaps Martin dropped or otherwise lost the tan bag and beverage can at some point and returned to retrieve it.

That could possibly account for doubling back from the area of the Green residence to the area of the "T" and possibly account for the can being separated from the bag.

I would be more inclined that the wind blew that bag to its resting place.

I am working from memory here so IIRC:

I wonder why, if they did two swabs on the candy bag that nothing ever came of it.  I never saw anything in the reports.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: spectator on July 19, 2012, 08:13:02 PM
I think what happened at the "T" according to the evidence, is backed up by GZ describing the "skipping", i think TM running and skipping with cocky body language is what GZ was trying to describe, as opposed to a sprinter or someone scared moving deliberate, i think the odds are TM was in place and listening to GZ on the phone and became more enraged and decided to attack, there is so much more that happened that night and George hasn't explained it all in detail,  we have only heard condensed versions for the most part.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 19, 2012, 08:25:12 PM
I would be more inclined that the wind blew that bag to its resting place.

I am working from memory here so IIRC:

I wonder why, if they did two swabs on the candy bag that nothing ever came of it.  I never saw anything in the reports.

"I would be more inclined that the wind blew that bag to its resting place."

From where?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on July 19, 2012, 08:43:06 PM
"I would be more inclined that the wind blew that bag to its resting place."

From where?

I think he had it in the front pocket of the hoodie.  All of the heavy items stayed in the pocket and the bag came loose during the scuffle. 

How do you propose the bag got there?  I hardly think that TM returned to pick up a bag when he all of the items in his pocket. 

BTW, I read in one of the reports that an EMS tech mentioned the button still being on his hoodie, not in the pocket.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 19, 2012, 09:29:24 PM
I think he had it in the front pocket of the hoodie.  All of the heavy items stayed in the pocket and the bag came loose during the scuffle. 

Perhaps so.  I do wish those who noticed the can in the hoodie pocket had mentioned whether it was still in the bag or not, but they were busy trying to get it out of the way to get to the wound.

Perhaps they unzipped the hoodie and opened it and that's when the can fell from the pocket and slid out of the bag, leaving the bag at the wind's mercy.

They were busy trying to keep him from dying and keeping up with the can or the bag would have been a much lower priority.

How do you propose the bag got there?  I hardly think that TM returned to pick up a bag when he all of the items in his pocket. 

Someone has posited the theory that Martin somehow lost the bag and can during his initial "rapid removal of himself from Zimmmerman's line of sight", and perhaps he returned for it and that's when he and Zimmerman came into close proximity.

BTW, I read in one of the reports that an EMS tech mentioned the button still being on his hoodie, not in the pocket.

If I'd been told it came off during the struggle I'd have found that quite believable, although I suppose it depends on the nature of the struggle as to whether it was odd that it didn't.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on July 19, 2012, 09:57:13 PM
Someone has posited the theory that Martin somehow lost the bag and can during his initial "rapid removal of himself from Zimmmerman's line of sight", and perhaps he returned for it and that's when he and Zimmerman came into close proximity.

Did this someone have a scintilla of evidence that that happened?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 19, 2012, 10:09:11 PM
Did this someone have a scintilla of evidence that that happened?

As I said, it's someone's theory, and it doesn't necessarily conflict with the "St. George and the Drug Goon" narrative so beloved here.

Martin disappears around corner and hides somewhere, losing the bag and can sometime during the process.

Zimmerman gets to "T", looks around, doesn't see Martin, proceeds east to RVC to get that address.

Martin comes out of hiding, retrieves bag and can, Zimmerman comes back west enroute to truck, Martin is enraged that he won't go away and stay away, and comes at him out of the dark.

See, it's possible without contradicting the main narrative.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on July 19, 2012, 10:30:31 PM
As I said, it's someone's theory, and it doesn't necessarily conflict with the "St. George and the Drug Goon" narrative so beloved here.

There are theories based on the evidence, and there are theories than are nothing more than baseless conjecture.  I just wanted to establish which it was.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on July 19, 2012, 10:47:25 PM
There are theories based on the evidence, and there are theories than are nothing more than baseless conjecture.  I just wanted to establish which it was.

I think that one based on when we saw the 7-11 video the can was in the bag and later it wasn't, what are the possibilities for how they got separated.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: spectator on July 20, 2012, 02:27:15 AM
As I said, it's someone's theory, and it doesn't necessarily conflict with the "St. George and the Drug Goon" narrative so beloved here.

Martin disappears around corner and hides somewhere, losing the bag and can sometime during the process.

Zimmerman gets to "T", looks around, doesn't see Martin, proceeds east to RVC to get that address.

Martin comes out of hiding, retrieves bag and can, Zimmerman comes back west enroute to truck, Martin is enraged that he won't go away and stay away, and comes at him out of the dark.

See, it's possible without contradicting the main narrative.


We might hear how that happened, as of now there's a large number of possibles but that's one of the funniest i've heard so far, but it is possible.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: turbo6 on July 30, 2012, 09:38:51 PM
Martin comes out of hiding, retrieves bag and can, Zimmerman comes back west enroute to truck, Martin is enraged that he won't go away and stay away, and comes at him out of the dark.

Its odd that he even took a bag to begin with, considering he was probably going to stow the items in the front hoodie pocket for the trek home. GZ never mentioned a bag, but rather something in his hand so perhaps he simply "wrapped" the bag up around the Arizona can and clutched that and later put it in the front pocket.

The fact that he chose to keep the items on him, rather than putting them down seems telling to me that he likely felt confident he wasn't going to lose the items after confronting GZ and by having them tucked away he could quickly return home with them, without having to go back with nothing to show for the trip.

Initiating the encounter with his hands free versus approaching with the bag in hand, allows to play offense or defense much easier. If it played out anything like when they crossed paths by the SUV, a startled GZ giving a meek response to his question, while nervously fumbling in his pockets - That was more than likely the confirmation TM was looking for to "Can I take care of this guy?".

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 30, 2012, 09:58:24 PM
Its odd that he even took a bag to begin with, considering he was probably going to stow the items in the front hoodie pocket for the trek home. GZ never mentioned a bag, but rather something in his hand so perhaps he simply "wrapped" the bag up around the Arizona can and clutched that and later put it in the front pocket.

The fact that he chose to keep the items on him, rather than putting them down seems telling to me that he likely felt confident he wasn't going to lose the items after confronting GZ and by having them tucked away he could quickly return home with them, without having to go back with nothing to show for the trip.

Initiating the encounter with his hands free versus approaching with the bag in hand, allows to play offense or defense much easier. If it played out anything like when they crossed paths by the SUV, a startled GZ giving a meek response to his question, while nervously fumbling in his pockets - That was more than likely the confirmation TM was looking for to "Can I take care of this guy?".

I agree if I got a bag with candy and a can in it once I relocated the contents of that bag to my pocket I have no need for the bag.

Perhaps Martin, realizing his environmental faux pas was retaining the bag, obstinately avoiding refuse cans on his return path. Perhaps he was  awaiting the day when science would find a way to transform plastic bags into egg Mcmuffins?
 Then again he might have been anticipating finding other items that he might collect in an easily discard-able bag. We don't know if that would be a valid prediction of his fortune at this juncture.


Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: whitecap333 on August 04, 2012, 06:02:21 PM
It's a little difficult for me to believe that Martin would have wanted to remain engaged in chit-chat with Dee Dee once he decided to approach Zimmerman aggressively.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: annoyedbeyond on August 04, 2012, 06:18:55 PM
It's a little difficult for me to believe that Martin would have wanted to remain engaged in chit-chat with Dee Dee once he decided to approach Zimmerman aggressively.

So the obvious answer is that he wasn't approaching GZ aggressively.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: AJ on August 04, 2012, 06:38:09 PM
So the obvious answer is that he wasn't approaching GZ aggressively.

Given everything in this case, how is that anywhere close to being the "obvious" answer?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on August 05, 2012, 02:17:42 PM
Zimmerman didn't comment on the volume of the words exchanged between himself and Martin, and he wasn't asked about it.

My error.

In the reenactment, Zimmerman said Martin yelled.

2/27R, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4) 7:28-35
Quote
And then, when I got to right about here, he yelled, from behind me, to the side of me. He said, "Yo, you got a problem?"
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on September 14, 2012, 02:43:32 PM
From the "T", what are the distances to

1. Zimmerman's car?
2. Location of Martin's body?
3. Brandy Green's townhouse?

The best reference for these facts is?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: TalkLeft on September 14, 2012, 02:54:29 PM
From the "T", what are the distances to

1. Zimmerman's car?
2. Location of Martin's body?
3. Brandy Green's townhouse?

The best reference for these facts is?

The best reference would be for you to go to Twin Lakes and measure.
Other people's calculations off Google Maps are not necessarily factual or accurate.
We don't know exactly where he was parked.

You can also get the plat of Twin Lakes from the state assessor's office .

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on September 14, 2012, 03:35:20 PM
From the "T", what are the distances

From the T to the parking location Zimmerman marked on the map, (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/sets/72157630981402972/) about 185 or 190 feet.

In the reenactment Zimmerman had Sgt. Smith park at almost exactly the same spot, maybe a few feet further east. I think it was at least 170 feet from the T.

From the T to the body, about 45 feet.

From the T to Brandy Green's place, about 360 feet. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/7931970568/in/photostream)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on September 14, 2012, 04:46:32 PM
From the T to the parking location Zimmerman marked on the map, (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/sets/72157630981402972/) about 185 or 190 feet.

In the reenactment Zimmerman had Sgt. Smith park at almost exactly the same spot, maybe a few feet further east. I think it was at least 170 feet from the T.

From the T to the body, about 45 feet.

From the T to Brandy Green's place, about 360 feet. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/7931970568/in/photostream)

Thanks.  The bottom line is that it was around twice as far from Martin's intended destination as it was from Zimmerman's when the two met up at the T.   One could imagine O'Mara using that along with some reasonable timing guesses to argue, at the immunity hearing, that it was more likely than not that Martin provoked the original confrontation.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: spectator on September 14, 2012, 07:56:56 PM
From the "T", what are the distances to

1. Zimmerman's car?
2. Location of Martin's body?
3. Brandy Green's townhouse?

The best reference for these facts is?

Truck to the "T" 165 - 170 by the reenactment, but who knows.
Trayvon's body is a different story, it's been measured and TM's head is about 34ft south and 4ft west of the sidewalks, i believe the shooting happened very close to the cover ("sign") which is approximately 29ft south of the sidewalk.
With GZ extricating himself and the CPR TM was moved a few feet to the south.
Brandy's is about a full football field or 360ft. 
There is a pic of TM's body, the shot was taken from the neighbor's porch area
80 or so feet NW of the body, the tarp (head area) can barely be seen.
This pic is a clue to a fairly good estimate, if you use it don't forget about the fence sticking out from the roof line.

All this is my opinion but i'm confident about the measurements, the truck is another story.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: turbo6 on September 14, 2012, 08:43:21 PM
While we are on the subject of distances....anyone recall the approximate distance between the shell casing and body?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on September 14, 2012, 10:28:28 PM
While we are on the subject of distances....anyone recall the approximate distance between the shell casing and body?

The shell casing was underneath the body if I recall correctly.  They had to use a metal detector to find it after the body was removed to the morgue.  If you look at the picture of it in the grass it is nearly straight up and down.

If you are wondering about trajectory, there are a lot of factors to be considered.  It could have gotten deflected by clothing,  it could have been moved around a little with LE and EMS turning TM over first for CPR (LE) and later by EMS as they made their efforts, it could have been kicked around a little by feet.   Shell casing trajectory cannot be established like it would if a person was standing, firing with proper arm extension, etc.

My best guess is it got deflected in the clothing.  Zimmerman had on a jacket and Martin that hoodie.  With them being prone, the casing wouldn't have traveled that far.  IMO.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: turbo6 on September 15, 2012, 10:39:09 AM
I wasn't really expecting to ascertain much from the casing location but its an interesting piece of information nonetheless.

I would imagine if it were deflected it may have been off of Trayvon's left arm, as I believe George carried his Kel Tec on his right side and he described that he sort of wedged it past his arm towards his chest. As the casing ejected from George's right side it was likely to hit something or else it would have been a bit further away.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on September 17, 2012, 08:58:10 PM
Trayvon's body is a different story, it's been measured and TM's head is about 34ft south and 4ft west of the sidewalks

Cite?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: spectator on September 18, 2012, 02:29:12 AM
Cite?

 
Me !  :-[

Just intersect the measurements 39.1 and 37.1 , the pillars are about 2ft inside the roof line, and it's around 5ft south of the utility cover("sign"), which is 29ft south of the sidewalk.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on September 18, 2012, 10:34:13 PM

Just intersect the measurements 39.1 and 37.1

I don't know how to intersect measurements.

We don't know exactly how the pillars are situated, with respect to the T or to one another.

Quote
around 5ft south of the utility cover("sign"), which is 29ft south of the sidewalk.

That puts the body in the back yard of the first unit. I think this picture (http://media2.abcactionnews.com//photo/2012/05/17/DSC_0010_20120517180352_640_480.JPG) clearly shows the body opposite the second unit.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: annoyedbeyond on September 19, 2012, 06:21:02 AM
Ah yes, nothing's changed. No Matter is always right, everyone else is always wrong and there's just no point discussing it.

It's kind of a form of trolling. Unitron even got warned for it a couple of times. Why does NM get away with it?


I mean come on--NM says "I don't know how to intersect measurments"--but spectator is still wrong!

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on September 19, 2012, 10:32:03 AM
Ah yes, nothing's changed. No Matter is always right, everyone else is always wrong and there's just no point discussing it.

It's kind of a form of trolling. Unitron even got warned for it a couple of times. Why does NM get away with it?


I mean come on--NM says "I don't know how to intersect measurments"--but spectator is still wrong!

Please do not capitalize me.

It tickles.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: annoyedbeyond on September 19, 2012, 11:10:39 AM
Please do not capitalize me.

It tickles.

Had I been talking about my good buddy unitron I would not have capitalized you. However, as you appeared at the beginning of the sentence, normal rules of writing dictate you have to be encapitalated.  8)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on September 19, 2012, 12:12:33 PM
NM says "I don't know how to intersect measurements"

Can you explain what 'intersect measurements' means?

There is a thread (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2074.0.html) on the crime scene sketch. Spectator and I participated. It seems you did not, so I don't know if you've seen it.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on September 19, 2012, 10:48:14 PM
Had I been talking about my good buddy unitron I would not have capitalized you. However, as you appeared at the beginning of the sentence, normal rules of writing dictate you have to be encapitalated.  8)

Proper names, even internet handles, are rendered as they are, regardless of location.

And I'm not sure we are in full agreement on the definition of trolling.

As for being "encapitalated, that sounds like it would do something worse than tickle. :)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on September 19, 2012, 11:33:32 PM
Proper names, even internet handles, are rendered as they are, regardless of location.

Not until you pry the shift key from under my cold, dead finger.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on September 19, 2012, 11:37:44 PM
Not until you pry the shift key from under my cold, dead finger.

 ;D ROFLMAO ;D
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DarkSkiesRbest on September 20, 2012, 12:18:00 AM
Not until you pry the shift key from under my cold, dead finger.
;D
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: spectator on September 20, 2012, 03:08:30 AM
Can you explain what 'intersect measurements' means?

There is a thread (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2074.0.html) on the crime scene sketch. Spectator and I participated. It seems you did not, so I don't know if you've seen it.


Seen some of the nonsense out there about George's "reaching for the gun" and the DNA results ... pretty funny stuff.

Sorry i didn't get back,  i've had a few battles going on.
Been working on a utube to show much of the state's BS and ran into a problem.
It looks like i might have to reformat,  i'm crossing my finger it's not a "bulging cap".

Right now i'm on a very old back-up and it's painful to say the least ... but it's workable.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on September 20, 2012, 09:21:39 AM


Seen some of the nonsense out there about George's "reaching for the gun" and the DNA results ... pretty funny stuff.

Sorry i didn't get back,  i've had a few battles going on.
Been working on a utube to show much of the state's BS and ran into a problem.
It looks like i might have to reformat,  i'm crossing my finger it's not a "bulging cap".

Right now i'm on a very old back-up and it's painful to say the least ... but it's workable.

Completely off-topic, but I think you can PM me here to give greater detail about your encounter with "capacitor plague".
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 17, 2013, 08:18:49 PM
Responding to post on another thread.

With how much precision will earwitnesses (other than the young lady) be able to pinpoint, location-wise, not time-wise,  the beginning of the physical encounter?

What do you think the prosecution might argue on this point? How precise do the ear witnesses need to be to counter that argument?

The prosecution has the burden of proof. What matters is what they will try to prove, and what the evidence is either way.

All the evidence is consistent with the verbal confrontation happening, and physical altercation beginning, where Zimmerman said it did, except for a few of Zimmerman's own statements.

Zimmerman at first didn't remember the altercation moving after it began. After seeing the scene in the reenactment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4), he recalled trying to push Martin away, and thought he was stumbling southward at the time (7:53-8:35).

Zimmerman never remembered any lateral movement after the two were on the ground. In the light of my limited experience with wrestling in high school gym class, I think that's quite unsurprising. As I recall, it was routine to suddenly find that my opponent and I were at the edge of the ring.

I don't think the prosecution will try to argue that the altercation started anywhere but where Zimmerman said it did. The overwhelming weight of evidence is the other way.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 17, 2013, 08:35:26 PM
I don't think the prosecution will try to argue that the altercation started anywhere but where Zimmerman said it did. The overwhelming weight of evidence is the other way.
???  Are you sure you mean those last three words?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 17, 2013, 08:54:33 PM
Are you sure you mean those last three words?

Yes.

I thought it was clear. Is 'anywhere but' confusing you by introducing another negative?

Try it like this: 'I don't think the prosecution will try to argue [X]. The overwhelming weight of evidence is the other way.'
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 17, 2013, 09:14:56 PM
Is the meaning, "I think the prosecution will acknowledge that the altercation started near the "T" since the overwhelming weight of the evidence says it did."?  If that is what you mean, what about DeeDee?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on March 17, 2013, 11:31:58 PM
Is the meaning, "I think the prosecution will acknowledge that the altercation started near the "T" since the overwhelming weight of the evidence says it did."?  If that is what you mean, what about DeeDee?

What about her?  She never said that Martin was by the "T" intersection despite the fact that we know he ended up there. 
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 17, 2013, 11:53:09 PM
Is the meaning, "I think the prosecution will acknowledge that the altercation started near the "T" since the overwhelming weight of the evidence says it did."? 

I don't see a reason for them to stipulate to that.

If there is a good argument for the altercation starting somewhere other than where Zimmerman said, I would like to know what it is.

Quote
what about DeeDee?

What about her?

Seriously, I don't know what you are getting at.

The timeline is problematical for both the prosecution and the defense. The prosecution's theory, as presented in the charging affidavit, (http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2012/04/trayvon-martin-shooting-death-affidavit-of-probable-cause-text-version.html) fails to explain why Martin wasn't already home by the time Zimmerman got off the phone. Zimmerman's statements don't explain why he wasn't back in his truck by the time the confrontation started. Those are the places the affidavit, and Zimmerman's statements, say the respective principals were going. As I've said before, it's like it all happened in a Zeno's paradox universe, where no one can reach a destination no matter how much time they have to get there.

So far, I have seen no sign of the prosecution revising their theory. They just might brazen it out, hoping for a math-challenged jury.

If the prosecution does change their theory, Dee Dee might embellish her story accordingly. She's got 'a couple of minutes' that are a clean slate. She can say anything happened in that time without directly contradicting herself.

If the prosecution's theory changes, but Dee Dee's story stays much the same, they will have to work around the problem. They could argue that it isn't likely Martin would detail his every move, and that Dee Dee may have misunderstood some of the things he did say.

Of course that would cast some doubt on the rest of Dee Dee's story. But it's minor compared with other issues. If the jury forgives Dee Dee for lying about the hospital, and letting Crump shape her account of the final dialogue, I don't think they'll even care that she was confused about which direction Martin was walking.

Sorry if that completely misses the point of the question.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on March 18, 2013, 07:06:46 AM
Responding to post on another thread.

What do you think the prosecution might argue on this point? How precise do the ear witnesses need to be to counter that argument?

The prosecution has the burden of proof. What matters is what they will try to prove, and what the evidence is either way.

All the evidence is consistent with the verbal confrontation happening, and physical altercation beginning, where Zimmerman said it did, except for a few of Zimmerman's own statements.

Zimmerman at first didn't remember the altercation moving after it began. After seeing the scene in the reenactment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4), he recalled trying to push Martin away, and thought he was stumbling southward at the time (7:53-8:35).

Zimmerman never remembered any lateral movement after the two were on the ground. In the light of my limited experience with wrestling in high school gym class, I think that's quite unsurprising. As I recall, it was routine to suddenly find that my opponent and I were at the edge of the ring.

I don't think the prosecution will try to argue that the altercation started anywhere but where Zimmerman said it did. The overwhelming weight of evidence is the other way.

You forgot to bring along  "...where witnesses say the confrontation started."

Which is kind of important since what I have been asking about the whole time is if anyone other than Zimmerman can place the beginning of things at the T specifically, instead of just out back of their house somewhere.

Zimmerman's "I must have stumbled forward a whole bunch while I was getting knocked straight to the ground" routine has me wondering if any of it happened at the T.

Quite separate from the question of whether or not Zimmerman is guilty of anything is the question of whether any reliance can be placed upon his memory.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 18, 2013, 07:23:21 AM
Responding to post on another thread.

What do you think the prosecution might argue on this point? How precise do the ear witnesses need to be to counter that argument?

The prosecution has the burden of proof. What matters is what they will try to prove, and what the evidence is either way.

All the evidence is consistent with the verbal confrontation happening, and physical altercation beginning, where Zimmerman said it did, except for a few of Zimmerman's own statements.

Zimmerman at first didn't remember the altercation moving after it began. After seeing the scene in the reenactment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4), he recalled trying to push Martin away, and thought he was stumbling southward at the time (7:53-8:35).

Zimmerman never remembered any lateral movement after the two were on the ground. In the light of my limited experience with wrestling in high school gym class, I think that's quite unsurprising. As I recall, it was routine to suddenly find that my opponent and I were at the edge of the ring.

I don't think the prosecution will try to argue that the altercation started anywhere but where Zimmerman said it did. The overwhelming weight of evidence is the other way.

I'm sorry if I missed this upthread, but was there a discussion/reasoning behind why the phone and the flashlight are at the area near the end of the fight, as opposed to near the Tee ? My first thought is that it would be more likely for those items to come loose at the start of the fight, rather than the end.

Also, any discussion on George returning to the area of the Tee after the fight, close to where his car keys were located ? This is according to witness 13 and witness 18.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 18, 2013, 07:25:58 AM
I think NMNM addressed this quite well.  Its not odd that a struggle would move 35-40 feet in 60+ seconds.  Its not odd that a participant might not be aware of exactly what movements took them from point A to point B.  GZ was asked a question and he attempted to provide some details that he wasn't completely sure of.  He should have just answered that he didn't recall other than being knocked down and trying to get away from TM.  Given that W6 details the two moving 5-10 feet on the ground in the 10 seconds he observed them, I don't think the location of where the conflict ended is an issue for the defense.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 18, 2013, 10:10:33 AM
The Affidavit of Probable Cause in this case has this:
Quote
Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin who was trying to return to his home.
Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.
I think the first sentence would have been OK, if it had been toned down to "Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to try to see if he could locate Martin."  Unless they have damning GPS data, there is no way they can even make the first sentence, as is, even plausible.  The Witness 11 and keychain evidence seem to place the start of the confrontation near the T, something that seems incompatible with Martin trying to return to his home.  I think the prosecution wants the jury to infer that Zimmerman was "following" in the sense that for a period of time before the confrontation, their relative positions and velocities were something like:

Zimmerman---->Martin--> where the arrows show both the direction and magnitude of the velocities. 

With or without DeeDee's testimony, how they might prove that is the big mystery.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 18, 2013, 01:34:15 PM
You forgot . . .

Guess again.

I'm sorry you found my response unsatisfactory. It was not because I 'forgot' anything.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 18, 2013, 05:11:58 PM
what I have been asking about the whole time is if anyone other than Zimmerman can place the beginning of things at the T specifically

After all this time, I assumed you had some idea of what the witnesses said. I thought you were challenging the significance of it.

No witness, Zimmerman included, puts it 'at the T specifically'. In the reenactment, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4) Zimmerman was standing on the sidewalk west of the T, with one foot on the joint of the first and second segments (8:13). He emphasized that he wasn't sure of the exact location (8:04-13).

Quote
Zimmerman: And then, he was here, and he punched me in the face.

Serino: Right here?

Zimmerman: Right as -

Serino: About?

Zimmerman: - around here. To be honest with you -

Serino: That's fine.

Zimmerman: I don't remember exactly.

Serino: That's fine.

W-11, SPD, 3/2/12, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-2tTr2gEGg&feature=related) 7:04-21
Quote
W-11: It sounded like it all started right on the sidewalk by our house there.

Serino: Mmhmm.

W-11: And then, maybe like it bent the corner, and, right there is where the scuffle started, and kinda scooted down. You know what I mean?     

Serino: Yeah. [Crosstalk.]

W-11: Because it definitely went past the back of our house.

This seems to put the start of it somewhere north of W-11's unit, about 15 feet west of where Zimmerman suggested. W-11 was specific about putting it 'right on the sidewalk'.

Later, W-1 seemed to be indicating two possible locations on a drawing, or some kind of improvised diagram or model.

7:42-8:10
Quote
W-11: So let's pretend my house is here. I think it might have started either here, or here, and then came around here.

Serino: Well, this here's the sidewalk, right?

Singleton: This is, this is Twin Tree [sic].

W-11: There's two sidewalks, yeah.

Singleton: This is Twin Tree, and this would be going to the mailboxes [crosstalk] clubhouse.

W-11: OK. Gotcha. So then it either started here, or here, and then it came over here, and this is where [crosstalk].

Singleton: So you think it started on this portion of the sidewalk? 

W-11: Yes.

Singleton: From the sound?

W-11: From the sound, yeah.

Singleton: And then, this, where are you at, I'm sorry? 

W-11: Right here.

Singleton: You're right here. So you could hear it passing here?

W-11: Right.

W-20, SPD, 3/2/12, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJXcT-r4MiI&feature=relmfu) 0:49-1:00
Quote
W-20: All of a sudden, kinda sounded like to the back left of the unit, and it was raining outside, but we heard kind of a scuffle, or kinda just ruffling around in the bushes.

If 'to the back left of the unit' means to the left as one looks out the back, that would be north of the unit, consistent with Zimmerman and W-11.

W-20 later indicated some uncertainty.

4:01-9
Quote
W-20: And so we couldn't tell how far away it started. We were trying to, you know, figure out how it started. But also the rain probably muffled the sound. So we couldn't, you know, it could have been right there.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 20, 2013, 01:37:12 AM
I think the statements of W-11 and W-20, putting the start of the altercation north of their unit, are strongly supported by the pattern of what was and wasn't heard by different witnesses.

W-11 and W-18 distinguished the sounds of two or more men shouting, before the screams for help began. None of the witnesses south of W-11's unit heard that.

W-3, W-6, and W-14 only heard the screams for help. W-1 heard a noise like screaming kids, either 'no' or wordless (3/1, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY6kb47CTeg) 1:23-42, 3/20, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ0yg8xvPxw) 1:09-26).  W-2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnzKIvvCNxA&feature=relmfu) heard one or two words, like 'no' or 'yo', shortly before the shot (3/1, 0:48-55, 3/9, 2:36-3:04, 3/20, 7:42-57).

Because of the timing, I don't think the 'yo' suggested by W-2 should be identified with the 'yo' that Zimmerman attributed to Martin once, in the reenactment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qfkRTC5gF4) (7:28).

Another piece of the mosaic is W-6's description of noise that at first seemed distant and then came closer.

W-6, FDLE, 3/20 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUvBZicWPDE)

2:03-25
Quote
W-6: And, while we were watching TV, we kinda heard, some loud noise outside. So we figured maybe it was just, you know, either kids in the neighborhood, or people, you know, just, having a good time outside. And, then we heard it again, so we muted the TV but didn't hear anything for a second. And then we heard it, like it was coming towards us, getting a little louder.

8:14-38
Quote
W-6: You could tell it was farther away from where it ended up, in the grass area, you know, behind our townhomes right here. It seemed like it was a lot farther away, because, as time went on, it got closer, and you could, could really, tell, "Oh, that's, I think that's someone really yelling help this time," and it's not, people outside, you know, roughhousing, and, you know.

9:13-58
Quote
W-6: If you hear someone yelling, and they're two blocks, three blocks down, it's gonna be a faint sound, you know, you're not gonna hear it as loud. But it sounded like it more, it more, it progressed towards us. I don't know if it was coming from the left or the right. But, the sound just got louder, because I think it, either someone had started, you know, yelling "Help!", and it just got closer and closer, until, you know, we could truly hear it, close enough, and that makes sense because it was right, you know, in the back yard area. That's what I mean, it sounded, you know, like it was getting closer, just the, the sound of the "Help"s, that were getting closer, with movement towards, you know, our location.

The last pieces are the items found on the ground.

The keychain flashlight, found a few feet to the south and west of the T, was turned on, suggesting that it was dropped from someone's hand.

In his FDLE interview, W-13 indicated he saw the keychain flashlight on the ground near the T, just after he went outside.

Quote
Investigator: Did you, after you went outside with your flashlight, and looked around, was it anything laying on the ground that you noticed out of the ordinary?

W-13: No. Along, along with just the kid laying there, I saw, I noticed there was one, it, it looked like one of those tactical flashlights. And then, towards the corner, on the sidewalk, across from where the, that poop station is, was a, like a little flashlight. I don't know if it could have been, like, it looked like a flashlight to me anyways. So it looked like there was two flashlights on the ground.

The only place I know to find this interview is Axiom Amnesia, which I've been asked not to link.

Zimmerman's main flashlight, and Martin's phone, were probably in their pockets, and worked their way out as the two wrestled. That would take time, consistent with their locations close to where the struggle ended.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 20, 2013, 07:00:36 AM
I am in total agreement with the previous 2 posts about where the confrontation between the two began and which direction it progressed.  It does not answer the question of how the two individuals came together in that location, but it does not contradict anything GZ said about the path he took or was on when the confrontation began.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 20, 2013, 01:39:56 PM
The previous 2 posts don't address why the flashlight and cellphone are by the body, not closer to the Tee. Didn't George tell singleton he had the flashlight in his hand ?

They also doesn't preclude the possibility of George and Trayvon encountered each other near the tee, and exchanged words there, but moved south during their  exchange prior to the altercation starting.

Also, I guess I'm surprise nobody has any thoughts about  George returning to the area of the Tee after the fight, close to where his car keys were located ? This is according to witness 13 and witness 18. That seems to be an odd thing for George to do.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 20, 2013, 02:34:37 PM
The previous 2 posts don't address why the flashlight and cellphone are by the body, not closer to the Tee. Didn't George tell singleton he had the flashlight in his hand ?

It was to Serino, not Singleton, and he said he thought he had the flashlight in his hand. A reasonable conjecture, I think, is that he may have actually put the non-working flashlight in his pocket, and had the small key-chain flashlight in his hand.

Quote
Serino: Yeah, I mean it’s, um, like I say you’re not in custody, you’re not on probation, I have no (unintelligible) with your doing anything. I’m doing a fair and impartial investigation here. And, um, I have some inconsistencies that don’t amount to much, but, um, I mean, I guess, you know, well hopefully by the time we’re done here today we’ll ha..have enough to go ahead and, you know, not have folks looking at me, ha… like I’m crazy for not arresting you, OK? At the time of the encounter with him, was there anything in your hand?
Zimmerman: I think my flashlight.
Serino: OK. The flashlight. Was it working or was it not working?
Zimmerman: It was dead.
Serino: It was dead. OK. It was not clicking on. It was in your right hand or left hand?
Zimmerman: I don’t know.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 20, 2013, 02:47:51 PM

The previous 2 posts don't address why the flashlight and cellphone are by the body

Zimmerman's main flashlight, and Martin's phone, were probably in their pockets, and worked their way out as the two wrestled. That would take time, consistent with their locations close to where the struggle ended.

clouseau
Quote
Didn't George tell singleton he had the flashlight in his hand ?

MJW has addressed this. I have a few things to add.

The quote MJW cited is from the second part of the 2/29 interview. The part about the flashlight starts about 1:23.

Audio (http://www.mysanfordherald.com/view/full_story/19101074/article-Video--audio-tell-George-Zimmerman%E2%80%99s-account-of-Trayvon-Martin-shooting-?instance=home_news_right)

Zimmerman didn't say which flashlight was in his hand. I think it was more likely the keychain flashlight, because it was turned on when it was found.

Zimmerman never mentioned having a second flashlight in his SPD interviews, as if he had forgotten it.

clouseau
Quote
They also doesn't preclude the possibility of George and Trayvon encountered each other near the tee, and exchanged words there, but moved south during their  exchange prior to the altercation starting.

Good point.

The statements of W-11 and W-6 suggest they continued moving south after it got physical.

clouseau
Quote
Also, I guess I'm surprise nobody has any thoughts about  George returning to the area of the Tee after the fight

In his FDLE interview, W-13 indicated he saw the keychain flashlight on the ground near the T, just after he went outside.

We discussed this last month on another thread, starting here. (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2293.msg105952.html#msg105952)

clouseau
Quote
That seems to be an odd thing for George to do.

Why? He was expecting a police officer, who would be likely to park on one of the streets and take the cross walk into the backyard area.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 20, 2013, 03:45:07 PM
Zimmerman never mentioned having a second flashlight in his SPD interviews, as if he had forgotten it.

The small flashlight is quite mysterious. The Serino interview was conducted on March 29th, so by that time I'd think Zimmerman would have realized he'd lost his key. What makes it even stranger is that Zimmerman was never asked about the key or small flashlight. As far as I know, nothing in discovery has even established that it was actually Zimmerman's.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 20, 2013, 03:47:27 PM
Thanks for the additional info, I'll look further into it.

I still find it odd that instead of waiting near the incident, he felt the need to ... go find the police ? I wish he had been asked about what he was thinking or why he did that.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on March 20, 2013, 04:22:08 PM
I have a vague memory of having asked this recently, but then again I have a vague memory, period.

Was the little keychain flashlight still burning when it was noticed on the ground by somebody, and if so, who was that somebody?

Now watch somebody within about 5 seconds post a link to my having gotten the answer previously.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 20, 2013, 04:22:49 PM
The Serino interview was conducted on March 29th, so by that time I'd think Zimmerman would have realized he'd lost his key.

He had a lot on his mind.

As we've discussed on another thread, it could have been a spare key.

Quote
As far as I know, nothing in discovery has even established that it was actually Zimmerman's.

It does look like a Ridgeline key. See here (http://www.amazon.com/2007-Honda-Ridgeline-Remote-Combo/dp/B006841GMS) and here. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/8516446865/in/photostream/lightbox/)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 20, 2013, 04:27:53 PM
Was the little keychain flashlight still burning when it was noticed on the ground by somebody, and if so, who was that somebody?

CST Diana Smith, 80/184. (http://www.axiomamnesia.com/TrayvonMartinFiles/Trayvon-Martin-George-Zimmerman-FULL-case-report-documents.pdf)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 20, 2013, 05:40:08 PM
The Serino interview was conducted on March February 29th, so by that time I'd think Zimmerman would have realized he'd lost his key.

I originally typed "the 29th," then decided to specify the month, and for some reason typed the wrong one.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 20, 2013, 05:44:21 PM
Thanks for the additional info, I'll look further into it.

I still find it odd that instead of waiting near the incident, he felt the need to ... go find the police ? I wish he had been asked about what he was thinking or why he did that.

If you're going to claim Zimmerman walked to the "T" as though it's an established fact, please quote the witness statements that show that. I don't recall that it's clear he did that.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 05:30:15 AM
If you're going to claim Zimmerman walked to the "T" as though it's an established fact, please quote the witness statements that show that.

I think Zimmerman walked to the T or close to it because of this 4/4/12 drawing (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/8004493784/in/set-72157631577280174/lightbox/) by W-18. It seems to show Zimmerman meeting W-13 and one or two police officers just south of the T. Unfortunately, the lines aren't labeled, and I can't find anything in the discovery explicitly identifying them.

The drawing is mentioned in the summary of the 4/4/12 SAO interview (16-18/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)). Zimmerman's movements are also discussed, but without relating them to the drawing.

Quote
She could not see much due to the glare from her window so she turned off her night light. Then she saw two people on the ground one on top of the other.

O'Steen asked her where that was and she drew a diagram (in file).

Quote
The person who got up walked toward her window. He walked toward the top left.

Quote
[Redacted] said that someone ran down the sidewalk toward the person with a flashlight. He was not a police officer. She did not hear anything that was said between them.

Right away she saw another person with a flashlight running up. She heard the person standing there say "I shot Him". She saw the police officer handcuff him.

Quote
O'Steen asked if he walked anywhere else than toward her window. She said he did not and it was seconds before the police officer arrived.

The attached photocopy of the drawing (18/284) seems to be a later one. The date has been redacted, and some lines added to the upper left. The changes don't affect the lines that seem to be marking the paths of the men.

The copy linked above is from the 7th Supplemental (3/33 (http://www.cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/2012/09/GZ-Discovery-Redacted-0919.pdf)).

W-13's FDLE interview corroborates that Zimmerman came to meet him. I don't know that he ever indicated where they met.

Quote
Investigator: When you went out to take a look at the scene, when you first went out there, can you tell me what position, or where the people were standing, or where the kid was laying at?

W-13: Sure. He was, the guy was on the sidewalk, walking towards, this way, towards me, and, the kid was face down on the grass, his feet at an angle coming like, towards, this direction here, facing the patio.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 06:22:45 AM
If you're going to claim Zimmerman walked to the "T" as though it's an established fact, please quote the witness statements that show that. I don't recall that it's clear he did that.

I assume NMNM post above covers that.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 21, 2013, 06:47:37 AM
I think Zimmerman walked to the T or close to it because of this 4/4/12 drawing (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/8004493784/in/set-72157631577280174/lightbox/) by W-18.
My recollection is that this discussion started when Whonoze was trying to sell his idea that the confrontation didn't begin near the T and the reason the keychain with lit mini flashlight was found there is that Zimmerman dropped it there at this later point.  I don't buy that for a second.  There is no way Zimmerman would have maintained the keychain in his hand during the entire struggle.  It has never been established that any witness observed a flashlight, working or not, in Zimmerman's hands.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 07:16:24 AM
My recollection is that this discussion started when Whonoze was trying to sell his idea that the confrontation didn't begin near the T and the reason the keychain with lit mini flashlight was found there is that Zimmerman dropped it there at this later point.

Yes, that's the discussion I linked a few posts back.

For convenience I'll repeat the link. (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2293.msg105952.html#msg105952)


Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 08:03:33 AM
My recollection is that this discussion started when Whonoze was trying to sell his idea that the confrontation didn't begin near the T and the reason the keychain with lit mini flashlight was found there is that Zimmerman dropped it there at this later point.  I don't buy that for a second.  There is no way Zimmerman would have maintained the keychain in his hand during the entire struggle.  It has never been established that any witness observed a flashlight, working or not, in Zimmerman's hands.

George himself established he had a flashlight in his hand, but not which one, as NMNM posted here http://www.mysanfordherald.com/view/full_story/19101074/article-Video--audio-tell-George-Zimmerman%E2%80%99s-account-of-Trayvon-Martin-shooting-?instance=home_news_right (http://www.mysanfordherald.com/view/full_story/19101074/article-Video--audio-tell-George-Zimmerman%E2%80%99s-account-of-Trayvon-Martin-shooting-?instance=home_news_right).

There is no need that he had the mini flashlight in his hand the entire time. He could have had the 'tactical' flashlight in his hand.

And to be more precise, the mini-flashlight appears to be  about 8 feet away from the edge of the sidewalk, according to the total station measurements.

It certainly appears from witnesses witnesses 13 and 18 that it was possible George had the flashlight in his hand and was walking back toward the Tee, and dropped it when the police turned the corner and he put his hands out.



Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 08:34:17 AM
It certainly appears from witnesses witnesses 13 and 18 that it was possible George had the flashlight in his hand and was walking back toward the Tee, and dropped it when the police turned the corner and he put his hands out.

W-13 said (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2052.msg107826.html#msg107826) he saw the small flashlight on the ground adjacent to the 'poop station' when he first looked around the area. I think that would have been before Zimmerman was close to the T, and certainly before the police arrived.

He said it was on the sidewalk. Was that a mistake, or was it moved somehow?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 21, 2013, 08:37:50 AM
It certainly appears from witnesses witnesses 13 and 18 that it was possible George had the flashlight in his hand and was walking back toward the Tee, and dropped it when the police turned the corner and he put his hands out.
NMNM supplied this quote from W 13:
Quote
Investigator: Did you, after you went outside with your flashlight, and looked around, was it anything laying on the ground that you noticed out of the ordinary?

W-13: No. Along, along with just the kid laying there, I saw, I noticed there was one, it, it looked like one of those tactical flashlights. And then, towards the corner, on the sidewalk, across from where the, that poop station is, was a, like a little flashlight. I don't know if it could have been, like, it looked like a flashlight to me anyways. So it looked like there was two flashlights on the ground.
  I get from this that both flashlights were on the ground before the cops arrived.  Why wouldn't Zimmerman been using the mini flashlight to navigate the dark crosswalk back from RVC?  He had tried to get the bigger light to work, unsuccessfully; I think he would have used what worked.  Maybe there are other possible scenarios besides the mini light fell out of his hand when Martin smacked him in the face and the bigger light fell out of his pocket when he was wrestling on the ground.  I don't see the reason to look for another one at this point.  I wouldn't put much stock into what Zimmerman remembered having in his hand after the fight started.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on March 21, 2013, 08:55:55 AM
CST Diana Smith, 80/184. (http://www.axiomamnesia.com/TrayvonMartinFiles/Trayvon-Martin-George-Zimmerman-FULL-case-report-documents.pdf)

Mercy buckets!

But that raises the question of

"...At the time of the encounter with him, was there anything in your hand?
Zimmerman: I think my flashlight.
Serino: OK. The flashlight. Was it working or was it not working?
Zimmerman: It was dead.
Serino: It was dead. OK. It was not clicking on. It was in your right hand or left hand?
Zimmerman: I don’t know."

If he was holding the big dead flashlight, where was the little one and how did it get turned on?

If he was holding the little one and it was dead, how did it become undead?  Are there zombie flashlights out there we need to fear or make B movies about?

This case is so confusing.   ???
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 21, 2013, 09:12:56 AM
This case is so confusing.   ???
I have given up hope of trying to separate with certainty, the true, false because it is a lie, false because he forgot in Zimmerman's statements.  If you just concentrate on the information from other witnesses the reasonableness of the self defense claim is pretty evident.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 09:15:57 AM
Are there zombie flashlights out there we need to fear or make B movies about?

I'm thinking a Disney cartoon.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 10:08:10 AM
W-13 said (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2052.msg107826.html#msg107826) he saw the small flashlight on the ground adjacent to the 'poop station' when he first looked around the area. I think that would have been before Zimmerman was close to the T, and certainly before the police arrived.

He said it was on the sidewalk. Was that a mistake, or was it moved somehow?

~7:15: And the guy that was standing, where was he when you came around? He was on the sidewalk walking towards my direction, maybe 6 or 8 feet from the cross of the sidewalk.

Which is right where the mini-flashlight was.
 
Witness 18 statement on page 90 of the 1st discovery PDF states that GZ walked 10-20 feet away from TM to the tree and stopped there. The broad built man was standing closer to my window. He was standing close to the small tree....Now I watched a man with a flashlight run down the sidewalk and talk to him (the broad built man)
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 10:28:43 AM
It was to Serino, not Singleton, and he said he thought he had the flashlight in his hand. A reasonable conjecture, I think, is that he may have actually put the non-working flashlight in his pocket, and had the small key-chain flashlight in his hand.

So he says he has the non-working flashlight in his hand, but you think he actually put it in his pocket ?

I don't get it.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 10:38:33 AM
George himself established he had a flashlight in his hand, but not which one, as NMNM posted here http://www.mysanfordherald.com/view/full_story/19101074/article-Video--audio-tell-George-Zimmerman%E2%80%99s-account-of-Trayvon-Martin-shooting-?instance=home_news_right (http://www.mysanfordherald.com/view/full_story/19101074/article-Video--audio-tell-George-Zimmerman%E2%80%99s-account-of-Trayvon-Martin-shooting-?instance=home_news_right).

Sorry, he establishes that it was the one that didn't work in his hand.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 21, 2013, 10:55:54 AM
Sorry, he establishes that it was the one that didn't work in his hand.
I just said that I have given up hope of figuring out the truth of Zimmerman's statements but  I seriously doubt the truth of this one.  Why would he carry it instead of putting it in his pocket since it was useless to him on his return trip from RVC?  One thing I have noticed is that Zimmerman has a problem with English tenses.  He certainly had the large flashlight in his hand at one time and was trying to get it to work.  I doubt that was true when he arrived at the T, coming from RVC.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 11:01:38 AM
So he says he has the non-working flashlight in his hand, but you think he actually put it in his pocket ?

I don't get it.

Have you concluded that Zimmerman's statements to SPD do not contain a single inaccuracy?

If Zimmerman planted the keychain flashlight to make it look like the physical conflict started close to the cross walk, it's odd that he would forget to claim it was in his hand.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 11:18:43 AM
Have you concluded that Zimmerman's statements to SPD do not contain a single inaccuracy?

No, I have concluded that people pick and choose which "facts" to emphasize or play down, based on how they view the case.

If Zimmerman planted the keychain flashlight to make it look like the physical conflict started close to the cross walk, it's odd that he would forget to claim it was in his hand.

It's also odd he would say "the suspect punched me in the face. I fell backwards onto my back" and yet the fight, by the physical evidence, carried across 30+ feet.

I'm not advocating he placed/dropped his key/light by the tree near the tree, but I am not discounting it as a possibility yet either.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 11:25:37 AM
Why wouldn't Zimmerman been using the mini flashlight to navigate the dark crosswalk back from RVC? 

Possibly because he had forgotten that he had it.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 21, 2013, 12:16:58 PM
No, I have concluded that people pick and choose which "facts" to emphasize or play down, based on how they view the case.
I avoid using anything Zimmerman has said in making conclusions.  The exception is real time descriptions he is giving over the phone.  They don't depend on his memory and I don't think he is smart enough to make up descriptive stuff on the fly.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 12:44:57 PM
~7:15: And the guy that was standing, where was he when you came around? He was on the sidewalk walking towards my direction, maybe 6 or 8 feet from the cross of the sidewalk.

Good catch. I was overlooking this part in my recent posts.

It's not clear if W-13 saw the flashlight on the ground before or after he saw Zimmerman in the same area. So, at least until W-13 clarifies his recollections, it may have been physically possible for Zimmerman to turn on the flashlight and drop it without this action being seen by W-13 or W-18.

I don't think it's very likely Zimmerman would drop the flashlight accidentally, for no apparent reason, just after turning it on.  If he did, he would have had at least half a minute to pick it up again before Officer Smith arrived.

If Zimmerman hatched a clever scheme to plant exculpatory evidence, he forgot to follow through by claiming to have the flashlight in his hand and turned on when he was attacked.

If I were a prosecutor, I don't think I would want to be arguing such speculations to a jury.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 21, 2013, 01:18:35 PM
If I were a prosecutor, I don't think I would want to be arguing such speculations to a jury.
The prosecutor has something else in this case?  Even interpreting DeeDee's version of events, in a way favorable to the prosecution, is going to be speculation. 
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 21, 2013, 01:46:38 PM
The prosecutor has something else in this case?  Even interpreting DeeDee's version of events, in a way favorable to the prosecution, is going to be speculation.

I said 'such speculations' not 'any speculations'.

I don't agree the prosecution has nothing other than speculation. That's just rhetoric.

It's also not on topic. If you want to seriously discuss that, I suggest finding a different thread.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 21, 2013, 02:05:26 PM
So he says he has the non-working flashlight in his hand, but you think he actually put it in his pocket ?

I don't get it.

He said he thought he had the non-working flashlight in his hand, but he couldn't even recall which hand. That's a bit different than your claim that he said he had the flashlight in his had. What don't you get? That Zimmerman might not recall every detail of what he did that night? That he might have decided that it was more useful to have a working flashlight in his hand than a nonworking flashlight?

Are you whonoze under a new name?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 21, 2013, 02:20:09 PM
He said he thought he had the non-working flashlight in his hand, but he couldn't even recall which hand. That's a bit different than your claim that he said he had the flashlight in his had.

How is claiming he had a flashlight in his hand, but not remembering which hand materially different than claiming he had a flashlight in his hand ?

In both cases, one of his hands had a flashlight in it.

"...At the time of the encounter with him, was there anything in your hand?
Zimmerman: I think my flashlight.
Serino: OK. The flashlight. Was it working or was it not working?
Zimmerman: It was dead.
Serino: It was dead. OK. It was not clicking on. It was in your right hand or left hand?
Zimmerman: I don’t know."


What don't you get?

I don't get why when George himself says the flashlight in his hand (whichever hand that was) was not working, you decide that he actually had it in his pocket. The only reason I can think is because if he had it in his hand, then he would have had to hold on to it all the way from where he claims he was first punched at the tee,to all the way where the altercation ended, some 40 feet away. And that doesn't seem very believable, at least not to me.

That Zimmerman might not recall every detail of what he did that night?

No I get that, his different narratives make it quite clear he doesn't recall a whole lot of details.

That he might have decided that it was more useful to have a working flashlight in his hand than a nonworking flashlight?

No, I also get that it would be more useful to have a working flashlight.

Are you whonoze under a new name?
No.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 21, 2013, 02:37:52 PM
How is claiming he had a flashlight in his hand, but not remembering which hand materially different than claiming he had a flashlight in his hand ?

You left out the "think" part. Saying you think you did something is different than saying you did something. Saying you think you did something expresses a degree of uncertainty. The fact that he couldn't recall which hand shows he had no clear memory of having the flashlight in his hand.

I guess now I think you're not whonoze.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on March 21, 2013, 03:15:35 PM
I think that drawing indicates where she saw Zimmerman walk after the shooting.  Just IMO.  For an adult, that drawing was pretty craptastic.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 21, 2013, 06:32:50 PM
I think that drawing indicates where she saw Zimmerman walk after the shooting.  Just IMO.  For an adult, that drawing was pretty craptastic.

The witness drawings are uniformly terrible. I don't understand why the investigators couldn't have prepared accurate schematic drawings of the area, so the witnesses could just fill in the locations of TM, GZ, and whatever else they saw. The W18 interview was conduced over a month later, so there would have been plenty of time.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 22, 2013, 07:54:55 AM

If Zimmerman hatched a clever scheme to plant exculpatory evidence, he forgot to follow through by claiming to have the flashlight in his hand and turned on when he was attacked.

Yeah, I can't imagine him coming up with such a scheme seconds after having been in a physical confrontation and shooting TM.  For one, after hearing shots fired, you'd have to assume people were paying attention.  Reaching into his pocket, pulling out his keys/flashlight, turning it on and dropping it to the ground in an open area would be fairly easily noticed by any onlookers.  No one mentions any such activity other than GZ had walked in that general direction. 

And as mentioned above. if GZ had hatched this clever plan so quickly, you'd think he would have had his story aligned to take advantage of it.  Its clear there are inconsistencies and times he's being careful in his phrasing of words in his many statements to police, but I don't get the impression that these statements were calculated and concocted based on a plan he devised.  Seems more like someone trying to put the things he remembers in the best light possible for him.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 08:06:12 AM
You left out the "think" part. Saying you think you did something is different than saying you did something. Saying you think you did something expresses a degree of uncertainty. The fact that he couldn't recall which hand shows he had no clear memory of having the flashlight in his hand.

I guess now I think you're not whonoze.

Saying you think you did something is indicative of it it being more likely than not.

He didn't once mention the keychain flashlight, just the "non-working" (tactical) flashlight.

Why would you think that he didn't have the flashlight in his hand ?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 08:08:06 AM
Yeah, I can't imagine him coming up with such a scheme seconds after having been in a physical confrontation and shooting TM.  For one, after hearing shots fired, you'd have to assume people were paying attention.  Reaching into his pocket, pulling out his keys/flashlight, turning it on and dropping it to the ground in an open area would be fairly easily noticed by any onlookers.  No one mentions any such activity other than GZ had walked in that general direction. 

And as mentioned above. if GZ had hatched this clever plan so quickly, you'd think he would have had his story aligned to take advantage of it.  Its clear there are inconsistencies and times he's being careful in his phrasing of words in his many statements to police, but I don't get the impression that these statements were calculated and concocted based on a plan he devised.  Seems more like someone trying to put the things he remembers in the best light possible for him.

What do you believe George had in his hands at the Tee , and why ?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 22, 2013, 08:09:20 AM
When?  He seems to have been there multiple times before, during and after the conflict.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 08:12:07 AM
Before he walked back, after hanging up with non-emergency.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 22, 2013, 08:24:58 AM
I've answered this before.  I think he had his mini-light on while going back from RVC.  Earlier, on the trip there he had his large flashlight in his hand in a futile effort to get it to work.  Tell us why you care so much about this again.  If you were Whonoze it would be to tell us that the fight didn't start near the T but way south of it after Zimmerman ran down RVC , turned right on TTL and then north up the dog path, etc.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 08:29:43 AM
I've answered this before.  I think he had his mini-light on while going back from RVC.  Earlier, on the trip there he had his large flashlight in his hand in a futile effort to get it to work.  Tell us why you care so much about this again.  If you were Whonoze it would be to tell us that the fight didn't start near the T but way south of it after Zimmerman ran down RVC , turned right on TTL and then north up the dog path, etc.

I'm sorry I missed your earlier answer.

So he had the tactical flashlight on the way out, that he grabbed from his car before he got out. It didn't work, and you believe this because it is confirmed by the tapping sound, correct ?

And although he says in direct response to the question about what he had in his hand at the time of the encounter that he thinks he had the non-working flashlight, you think he had the keychain flashlight. Why ?


Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 22, 2013, 08:30:03 AM
My first response is, we don't know for certain.  Thinking logically, I would guess he had at least one, possibly 2 flashlights.  I tend to think it was probably 1, the key chain flashlight, not the small tactical one.  I would think whatever was in his hands at the time the physical altercation began would have either been dropped (because the attack was a surprise), or would have been used as a weapon.  IF GZ was prepared for a physical altercation and had it in his hands as a weapon, I can't imagine it would have been easily knocked out of his hands or that we'd see no wounds on TM from its use.  Mind you I am not saying this is impossible, just improbable given the other evidence.

With the confrontation beginning around the T (you'd have to believe multiple witnesses were lying or couldn't possibly discern this from the sounds they heard to believe otherwise) and ending up behind W6's residence, it seems most logical the working flashlight was in his hands and was dropped and the non working flashlight was probably in his coat pocket and fell out at some point during the conflict.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 22, 2013, 09:07:47 AM
I'm sorry I missed your earlier answer.

So he had the tactical flashlight on the way out, that he grabbed from his car before he got out. It didn't work, and you believe this because it is confirmed by the tapping sound, correct ?

And although he says in direct response to the question about what he had in his hand at the time of the encounter that he thinks he had the non-working flashlight, you think he had the keychain flashlight. Why ?

I think what is confusing you (and probably GZ) is that GZ had both a working and non working flashlight in his possession.  GZ did not make any mention of having anything in his hands as he gave his statements which tells me its not a detail he has any particular recollection of.  When prompted for this detail, he says, "I think" I had a flashlight and Serinos response "OK, the flashlight" which is an indication that GZ had only mentioned one flashlight prior to this and it was described as non-working. 

Again, if GZ had concocted a plan seconds after the shooting to go back to the 'T' and take out his key chain flashlight, turn it on and drop it on the ground (pretty risky proposition not knowing what witnesses had seen or heard), don't you think he would have mentioned having a key chain flashlight in hand that got dropped when he was punched?  Is it more likely GZ devised such a plan so quickly and executed it with no one noticing, then forgot to mention it in all of his interviews, or that he just wasn't sure what was in his hands when the fight occurred?

What you propose is not out of the realm of possibilities to have occurred.  I put it on even footing with the possibility that TM took control of the gun and shot himself.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 22, 2013, 09:15:42 AM
And although he says in direct response to the question about what he had in his hand at the time of the encounter that he thinks he had the non-working flashlight, you think he had the keychain flashlight. Why ?
We know from several witnesses and reconstructionists (see for example, Dave Knechel's recent youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-h0GmjHSkA) made 2/26/13) that it was extremely dark on both the cut through around the T and the dog path.  Zimmerman would have wanted to have something to shine on the wet ground, rather than groping along.  We have Serino confirming Zimmerman's claim that the large flashlight wasn't working.  It was found on the ground near where the fight ended, suggesting it fell out of his pocket during the struggle.  Everything Zimmerman has said shouldn't be believed, unless it can be corroborated.  He both forgets and prevaricates and it is often not clear which is operational.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 09:27:48 AM
We know from several witnesses and reconstructionists (see for example, Dave Knechel's recent youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-h0GmjHSkA) made 2/26/13) that it was extremely dark on both the cut through around the T and the dog path.  Zimmerman would have wanted to have something to shine on the wet ground, rather than groping along.

I agree it was dark. As to groping along ... there is a sidewalk there. And walked up the path without a working flashlight, correct ? All the way to RVC, right ?

We have Serino confirming Zimmerman's claim that the large flashlight wasn't working.  It was found on the ground near where the fight ended, suggesting it fell out of his pocket during the struggle.  Everything Zimmerman has said shouldn't be believed, unless it can be corroborated.  He both forgets and prevaricates and it is often not clear which is operational.

I appreciate your position of trying to not take Gorge at his word for things that cannot be corroborated.

Under those circumstances, then, there is no clear evidence that the fight started at the Tee, as George claims.  Only Georges uncorroborated word, and a keychain flashlight that is never mentioned 6-8 feet away from the tee. And an unaccounted for length of time George was was in the are of RVC and/or the Tee.

Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on March 22, 2013, 09:56:55 AM
I agree it was dark. As to groping along ... there is a sidewalk there. And walked up the path without a working flashlight, correct ? All the way to RVC, right ?

I appreciate your position of trying to not take Gorge at his word for things that cannot be corroborated.

Under those circumstances, then, there is no clear evidence that the fight started at the Tee, as George claims.  Only Georges uncorroborated word, and a keychain flashlight that is never mentioned 6-8 feet away from the tee. And an unaccounted for length of time George was was in the are of RVC and/or the Tee.
For part of the way going from TTL to RVC, his headlights might have illuminated part of the cut through.  Some people claim to hear the sounds of the large flashlight hitting something in the NEN call so it was reasonable that he was trying to get it to work then.  We don't know the point he gave up trying to get it to work and he switched to the mini flashlight.  He wouldn't have needed the light on RVC since there is a street light near the intersection with TTL.  We have only ear witnesses to the physical struggle except for 10 seconds that Witness 6 watched.  Neither he nor anybody else saw any blows land, so if we dismiss Zimmerman's word, we have only the results to attest to his injuries. 

Again, where are you trying to go with this?  If you can prove that this wasn't self defense, there is a thread on How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case for you to give the details.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: AghastInFL on March 22, 2013, 10:00:46 AM
What says the key chain flashlight was working when it was dropped?
When does GZ identify the larger (here referenced as tactical) flashlight as the non-working flashlight?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: DebFrmHell on March 22, 2013, 10:07:34 AM
What is not logical is for Martin to approach Zimmerman if Zimmerman had a gun in his hand (heck, any kind of weapon) to ask why he is following him.   And that is without explaining why/how Martin found himself back at the intersection anyway after being off the grid for about 4 minutes.

If Zimmerman had his gun out, why did the altercation last a minimum of 38 seconds? 

Zimmerman did not have to sustain any kind of injury for a self-defense case.  It is based on a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.  He has injuries.  Martin, save the gunshot wound and an abrasion near his knuckle, sustained none.

Fights are fluid.  Movement in any direction is to be expected.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 11:43:45 AM
What is not logical is for Martin to approach Zimmerman if Zimmerman had a gun in his hand (heck, any kind of weapon) to ask why he is following him.   And that is without explaining why/how Martin found himself back at the intersection anyway after being off the grid for about 4 minutes.

If Zimmerman had his gun out, why did the altercation last a minimum of 38 seconds? 

Good point about the gun. As I said, I wasn't claiming he had it out. It was about using  logic to asses something that has a large component of emotion, not logic.

Zimmerman did not have to sustain any kind of injury for a self-defense case.  It is based on a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.  He has injuries.  Martin, save the gunshot wound and an abrasion near his knuckle, sustained none.

Fights are fluid.  Movement in any direction is to be expected.

It's not about self defense right now, for me. It's about trying to suss out what could have occurred at the Tee, and seeing if I can draw conclusions about what I believe is likely to have actually occurred.

And I understand fights are fluid, I think 30-40 feet to be very fluid, considering the actual written and verbal descriptions from George. And if it goes back down the road that we can't believe what George says because memory is imperfect etc, then that needs to be calculated into his version regarding where the initial punch took place.





Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 11:45:59 AM
What says the key chain flashlight was working when it was dropped?
When does GZ identify the larger (here referenced as tactical) flashlight as the non-working flashlight?

The keychain flashlight was found on (lighted). I can provide links to discovery documenting this, I think at least one was mentioned upthread.

He and serino are clearly discussing the tactical flashlight, based on context.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: unitron on March 22, 2013, 12:05:46 PM
What says the key chain flashlight was working when it was dropped?

It was a crime scene technician who said it was on when she found it.

nomatter_nevermind was kind enough to provide a link
http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2052.msg107871.html#msg107871

Granted, that does not prove that it was on when dropped, or for that matter that it was dropped, as opposed to carefully laid on the ground, or anything about when it wound up there, but when she found it, it was on.

I consider "It was on and then got dropped there at some point" the most likely explanation for its presence and state of operation.



When does GZ identify the larger (here referenced as tactical) flashlight as the non-working flashlight?

I'm not absolutely certain that he definitively does.  He mentions "a" non-working flashlight that he thinks was in one of his hands when the physical encounter began, but that would mean either that he was holding the "tactical" flashlight and somehow held onto it from the T to the place where the body was, or that he was holding the "keychain" flashlight, and lost it near the T and it, I guess, turned itself on when it hit the ground.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: AghastInFL on March 22, 2013, 12:12:00 PM
The keychain flashlight was found on (lighted). I can provide links to discovery documenting this, I think at least one was mentioned upthread.

He and serino are clearly discussing the tactical flashlight, based on context.

Ok...
Quote
Serino: ... you're walking in the darkness out there, you have a flashlight?
GZ: It was dead. I have one, but it was dead.
Serino: Uh, you had to hit it a couple of times, it's on right now, so.
GZ: Mm. Oh it is.
Serino: Yeah. Okay. Um it's probably like the one I have, you got to smack it around a couple of times...

Where is the reference? where is the identification? where or when does George mention the second flashlight? my point really is just that he refers to only one... are we sure which one? If one is safely stowed in his pocket then perhaps he no longer need mention it.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: AghastInFL on March 22, 2013, 12:23:47 PM
Not trying to drive this too far, just happened to consider this as I read..
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: TalkLeft on March 22, 2013, 12:43:57 PM
Comment by Clousseau mocking GZ's logic deleted. Adding a smilie button doesn't change the insult. Clousseau seems to be arguing for guilt, as he says for him/her the case is not about self-defense. If any commenter wants to argue for guilt, please take it to another forum. All views are allowed here, in moderation, and blog-clogging, dominating a thread to express one's view GZ's account is not credible, is not allowed. Such commenters will be limited in the number of times per day or thread they can express that view.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on March 22, 2013, 01:05:03 PM
Zimmerman's tactical flashlight model is notorious for the switch falling out of alignment, and needing some whacks to get it working. I don't have a cite for that, but it was widely mentioned early on.

Maybe the little flashlight had the same problem. Maybe it wasn't working when Zimmerman when first tried it, or it stopped working soon after. Maybe it turned on when it hit the ground.

I concede that we can't be 'sure' that this string of coincidences didn't happen, but that doesn't mean I have buy it as a reasonable explanation.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 01:30:41 PM
Comment by Clousseau mocking GZ's logic deleted. Adding a smilie button doesn't change the insult. Clousseau seems to be arguing for guilt, as he says for him/her the case is not about self-defense. If any commenter wants to argue for guilt, please take it to another forum. All views are allowed here, in moderation, and blog-clogging, dominating a thread to express one's view GZ's account is not credible, is not allowed. Such commenters will be limited in the number of times per day or thread they can express that view.

Sorry about the logic comment.

It's not about self defense right now, for me. It's about trying to suss out what could have occurred at the Tee, and seeing if I can draw conclusions about what I believe is likely to have actually occurred.

I meant that what happened at the Tee will not make or break a case self defense - not the case itself was not about self defense. I thought that was clear in context.

I thought it was a productive discussion about what happened at the Tee, and why the two flashlights ended up where they did.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 22, 2013, 02:06:28 PM
Saying you think you did something is indicative of it it being more likely than not.

And when you say you did something, it's indicative that you're certain of it. You've said more than once that GZ said he had the flashlight in his hand when he actually said he thought he had the flashlight in his hand. If I wrote that GZ said he might have had the flashlight in his hand, you'd rightly object that I was slanting the evidence.

Quote
He didn't once mention the keychain flashlight, just the "non-working" (tactical) flashlight.

I already mentioned that was odd. It's at least as odd that he was never asked about the keychain flashlight. The police found it, and according to police report, it was lit. Yet neither Singleton nor Serino asked GZ about it.

Quote
Why would you think that he didn't have the flashlight in his hand ?

If it it were me, I probably would have put the nonworking flashlight in a pocket so my hands would be free. If I had a keychain flashlight, I'd almost certainly carry it in my hand instead of the worthless nonworking one.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 02:53:29 PM
Ok...
Where is the reference? where is the identification? where or when does George mention the second flashlight? my point really is just that he refers to only one... are we sure which one? If one is safely stowed in his pocket then perhaps he no longer need mention it.

Upon further review, there isn't any clearer identification of the flashlight than unitron pointed out - the keychain flashlight  was "on" when found, so the tactical flashlight must, by process of elimination, be the flashlight they were discussing.

I don't think there is any dialogue I can point to to prove it.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: clouseau on March 22, 2013, 02:56:22 PM
And when you say you did something, it's indicative that you're certain of it. You've said more than once that GZ said he had the flashlight in his hand when he actually said he thought he had the flashlight in his hand. If I wrote that GZ said he might have had the flashlight in his hand, you'd rightly object that I was slanting the evidence.

I already mentioned that was odd. It's at least as odd that he was never asked about the keychain flashlight. The police found it, and according to police report, it was lit. Yet neither Singleton nor Serino asked GZ about it.

If it it were me, I probably would have put the nonworking flashlight in a pocket so my hands would be free. If I had a keychain flashlight, I'd almost certainly carry it in my hand instead of the worthless nonworking one.

I was really wondering more if you thought he didn't have the tactical flashlight in his hand because it didn't make as much sense with the physical evidence rather than that it would simply be better to have a working rather than non-working flashlight.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 22, 2013, 06:48:59 PM
I was really wondering more if you thought he didn't have the tactical flashlight in his hand because it didn't make as much sense with the physical evidence rather than that it would simply be better to have a working rather than non-working flashlight.

It doesn't make as much sense with the physical evidence if I assume the altercation began near the "T" and moved to W6's backyard, but I doubt you'd be willing to grant me that assumption.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: MJW on March 22, 2013, 07:15:40 PM
I'll modify my previous comment a little. Something has to explain how the keychain flashlight, apparently turned on, ended up near the "T." Assuming it was GZ's, the simplest explanation is that GZ had it in his hand, and dropped it when he was punched. If that's what happened, then it's unlikely GZ also had the non-working flashlight in his hand. To that extent, the physical eveidence best fits Zimmerman having the non-working flashlight in his pocket.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Departure on March 22, 2013, 09:44:18 PM
For part of the way going from TTL to RVC, his headlights might have illuminated part of the cut through.

GZ actually mentions this, at least once: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2cEqhj5dBY&t=40m5s


Some people claim to hear the sounds of the large flashlight hitting something in the NEN call so it was reasonable that he was trying to get it to work then.

GZ mentions this here Link (http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/audio/george-zimmermans-statements-sanford-pd-audio/).  Go to 12:12 of "Recording #6 – Detective Serino’s Interview With George Zimmerman – Part 3 (2/29/2012)"

GZ says: That's me hitting my flashlight... as I was walking

I actually go one step further.  In the NEN call, I believe I hear GZ say "sh*t, it doesn't work", or just "sh*t, doesn't work", at 2:44, right after he says his last name "Zimmerman", and as the dispatcher is talking over him.  This is right after the first bangs of the flashlight can be heard (which some people think is GZ doing something with his gun).
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: leftwig on March 23, 2013, 06:54:15 AM
I was really wondering more if you thought he didn't have the tactical flashlight in his hand because it didn't make as much sense with the physical evidence rather than that it would simply be better to have a working rather than non-working flashlight.

I think its possible he had both flashlights in his hands when TM approaches.  GZ mentions his phone was in his pocket (he reached for it as TM approached).  It would be reasonable to think that after hanging up with the dispatcher, he put his phone in his pocket and was devoting full attention to getting the flashlight to work.  When he failed again. reached into his pocket and got the key chain flashlight.  Having both flashlights in his hand as TM approaches, he reaches to get his phone which he said he thought was in his coat pocket.  As he did this, he would have deposited whatever was in that hand into the pocket in exchange for the phone, but the phone wasn't there.  After dropping the phone into the coat pocket, went to get his phone from his pants pocket and got socked, dropped then key chain flashlight on the ground and the struggle continued with the other flashlight falling out in the area the struggle ended.

On another note, I am not sure I understand why you don't believe the evidence that the fight began in the location of the T is convincing.  The witnesses closest to area describe that as the case and I think their descriptions pass the reasonable doubt threshold as long as you find them credible (not to be lying).  To my knowledge, the prosecution hasn't put forth any evidence to the contrary.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: Jack203 on March 26, 2013, 09:18:54 PM

I don't get why when George himself says the flashlight in his hand (whichever hand that was) was not working, you decide that he actually had it in his pocket. The only reason I can think is because if he had it in his hand, then he would have had to hold on to it all the way from where he claims he was first punched at the tee,to all the way where the altercation ended, some 40 feet away. And that doesn't seem very believable, at least not to me.


Why have you been punched several times in the past and the first thing that always occurs is the involuntarily dropping of whatever was in your hands?

Keep grasping at straws.




Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: turbo6 on May 07, 2013, 08:41:09 PM
The fact the smaller working light was closer to the T, whereas the larger nonworking one was further south suggests to me, the larger one was likely in his coat pocket and perhaps slipped out during the more intense portion of the struggle.

I can't imagine GZ would have bothered with it after it wasn't working after several taps. If its dead, its dead and if banging it several times doesn't work, continuing to do so another dozen times probably won't help either.

Being that it doesn't appear to be larger flashlight, like a Maglite for example, I doubt it would have much merit as a defensive tool, so I don't really see just cause for him to do anything other than slip it back into a pocket after a few attempts to revive it.

At least thats my rationale, GZ could have very well attempted to get it working again after getting off the phone, but it seems like at that point the primary concern would be trying to be aware of your surroundings.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 08, 2013, 12:49:32 PM
I can't imagine GZ would have bothered with it after it wasn't working after several taps. If its dead, its dead and if banging it several times doesn't work, continuing to do so another dozen times probably won't help either.

On the NEN recording, I think I hear the tapping for over 50 seconds (2:42-3:35). I haven't counted the number of taps.
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: ding7777 on June 24, 2013, 07:02:42 AM
Was the 7-11 bag ever tested for GM's DNA (ala juice can in a bag as a weapon) ?
Title: Re: What Happened at the "T"?
Post by: RickyJim on June 24, 2013, 07:11:33 AM
Was the 7-11 bag ever tested for GM's DNA (ala juice can in a bag as a weapon) ?
That has come up in this forum several times.  There is nothing in the discovery to indicate the bag was tested.