Posted on 03/24/2012 3:38:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
As the investigation into the investigation of the killing of Trayvon Martin continues, new facts are beginning to surface, and the Fox affiliate in Tampa Bay found an anonymous witness who spoke to them in George Zimmerman‘s defense, saying he saw the man who was mostly the aggressor in the struggle fall on the grass, dead.
Tampa Bay’s Fox 13 reported that the witness, who agreed only to be identified as “John,” saw the struggle and it was his testimony the police used to let Zimmerman go free (John spoke to Fox 13′s Orlando Affiliate, Fox 35). His statements to the cops were instrumental because Sanford police say those screams you hear,” the anchor notes, are Zimmerman’s and not Martin’s. Says John: “When I got upstairs and looked down, the person that was on top beating up the other guy was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point.”
The police report allegedly included notes of Zimmerman’s shirt being wet and grassy on the back, a sign of struggle. What it also includes, though, according to this report, is an initial assessment of the situation as “manslaughter and unnecessarily killing to prevent an unlawful act,” according to the first police officer on the scene.
This story is far from over as the story develops and Zimmerman’s side comes up to light. Given that the witness is anonymous and the only on-the-record supporters of Zimmerman’s are his parents, his neighbor, and his lawyer, however, a reasonable explanation for his behavior appears quite elusive. The station also compiled Zimmerman’s history of 911 calls, the police report from the night of Martin’s death, and a number of other handy documents to understand the situation.
The report via Fox 13 below:
(VIDEO AT LINK)
muawiyah, in your little abbreviated timeline, you conveniently leave out that Zimmerman told the dispatcher he had lost sight of Miller.
Why is that? Surely you’ve listened to Call 1 on the City of Sanford’s web page on this event? Are you taking lessons in reporting from the mainstream media?
The dartboard picture was there and a couple of others which looked innocent enough. Early in the case, a couple of days ago, I read that Martin had been suspended for 5 days and for tardiness, that’s all.
RAINING on that parade, the dude is dead. There is no more privacy. The school officials are PROTECTING THEMSELVES ~ an reasonable conclusion when they do this sort of thing.
So, why would the school people want to protect themselves? DID they expel the kid for little or no reason?
Main timeline is Zimmerman follows Martin. Zimmerman shoots Martin.
So what is your court of media attention verdict? This situation is guarded by police oversight. If this is invalid then all police oversight is invalid. Make up my mind already.
Wanted Dead or Alive Poster Issued for George Zimmerman by New Black Panther Party
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2863075/posts
You are absolutely correct: “wannabe gangsta” is my conjecture, that’s all. No evidence thus far.
Not everybody supporting Martin's right to self defense are voting Democrat.
OK, thanks. That tells me I can ignore you from here on out.
That a witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and pummeling him, in combination with Zimmerman telling the dispatcher he had lost sight of Martin, seems key to me, but yet we have people here ignoring it entirely. Crazy.
If you would bother to read the story, you would see that it says:
Published : Monday, 27 Feb 2012, 4:55 PM EST
Now I’m *REALLY* going to start ignoring you.
Well, George had no authority at all. Trayvon was walking through a neighborhood in which he was a guest, with signs at the entrance saying “neighborhood watch - all suspicious people will be reported” (or something like that.)
The really tragic thing is that I can see myself doing exactly what both of them did - up to a point.
Once he hung up the phone, Zimmerman clearly went down the walkway behind the buildings - I think in order to try to spot Martin. Bad judgment? Yeah, maybe. But “these assholes always get away” and he clearly wanted to be able to tell the police when they arrived where they could find the suspicious person. Would I have done that? Yeah, maybe.
Trayvon is headed for his dad’s place, and suddenly sees this guy coming down the path. Instead of running (he told his girlfriend he didn’t want to) he turns to confront the guy. “Why are you following me?” That’s how the conversation started.
Poor judgment? Yeah, I think so. Would I have done the same thing? Yeah, probably.
How it came to blows I do not know, and my account above is only speculation. But everything I have described to this point fits the known facts. Nothing I have described to this point is an illegal act by either person.
But there is only one living witness to what happened next, and he says the shooting was self-defense. The police say they have found no evidence to contradict his claim.
I’m not sure why so many people who know less about it than the police have reached a different conclusion.
Also, why did the father take Trayvon 250 miles away? I’m betting because whatever Trayvon did, he did with a bunch of other kids. Why didn’t Trayvon just stay at his mother’s house, where he lived? Because the mother worked and she didn’t trust Trayvon to stay at home alone. She recruited the dad to take Trayvon out of town and away from his homies.
That’s not an after the fact statement, as you imply, it is his recorded voice talking to the emergency call center operator.
You are leaving things out in a way I call _____ing by omission.
You fill in the blank. Our media does it all the time. You seem to as well.
Give me some time. I did post without a full dissertation of your answers. I did detect you following a line of fact without knowing or having the facts. This is disconcerting.
Yes, I am drawn to it, also. In my case it is because I can easily place myself in either person’s shoes, and can easily envision a scenario fitting all the known facts - right up until the first punch gets thrown - where I might have done the exact same thing as either one of them. And up until that point, it is likely that neither one committed any criminal act.
It’s just really tragic. And it is entirely reasonable to believe both that Martin was innocent, and that Zimmerman committed no crime. Or even that he might have, but there’s no evidence to prove it.
Sure are. And all the images of Martin make him look like he's 12 years old. Geez, hussein's campaign must be in more trouble than we thought.
I really don’t get what you’re trying to say here. It is undisputed that Martin was legally in the neighborhood, and resided (as a guest) in the neighborhood. It is entirely possible to believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, even though Martin was a basically good kid, who certainly does not deserve to be dead, as a result of a tragic chain of events involving poor (but not criminal*) judgment by both parties.
I don’t see how trying to dredge up dirt, or fabricate it, from either person’s background changes anything about what happened that night. I apologize if I’ve misinterpreted your intent.
* I recognize that whoever swung first committed assault, but I think we’ve all been in fights.
My point is, the media has gone to great lengths to portray Zimmerman in as bad a light as possible, while showing Trayvon as almost angelic- to the point of posting pictures that are years old. Everyone takes as gospel Trayvon was not acting suspiciously and was only targeted because he was black. But how do we know that. I’m pointing out inconsistencies that don’t make sense.
Not necessarily, no. :)
But even if the kid bought an ounce or something, that is hardly worth anything anymore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.