Posted on 03/24/2012 9:51:42 PM PDT by kristinn
A friend of George Zimmerman, the man who shot unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., told ABC News today that the voice heard howling on the tape of a 911 call was Zimmerman's, not the teen's.
The man, a black friend of the family who spoke to Zimmerman tonight, told ABC News that Zimmerman was weeping for days after the shooting, which sparked protests across the country, and he insisted that Zimmerman, who is Hispanic, is not a racist.
"We wanted to come forward because allegations of racism just aren't true. His friends speak highly of him," said attorney Greg Sonner, who has been representing Zimmerman for two weeks.
Zimmerman's friend said that the howls heard on the 911 call, which helped galvanize the nation against Zimmerman, in fact belonged to Zimmerman, not Martin.
A witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman told ABC News the same: the pleas for help were Zimmerman's.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
It wouldn’t matter if Jesus himself came back to earth and told ABC that Zimmerman was innocent. The black racist machine is cranked up and snowballing like a freight train.
Let's all go to the nearest hood and stand our ground. Hey kid, it’s raining, dark, you have your face hidden, I don’t recognize you, who are you and what are you doing? We can hand free hoodies to all the illegals. Perfect! /S
I’m missing your point.
More importantly who instigated the struggle. The cut on the back of Zimmerman's head is the real tell on this. An attack from the rear as Zimmerman was walking back to his truck. Or maybe Zimmrman heard Martin approaching and turned to face him before being knocked backward to the ground. Clearly it was Zimmerman laying on his back because of the grass and moisture transfered to the back of his clothing.
Either way, it supports Zimmermans version, and assumedly most of the six witnesses.
Looks like the cops made the right call in the beginning.
An armed man going out of his way to follow a stranger must be aware of the potential for confrontations and misperceptions and avoid them. If it was me instead of Zimmerman, I think I’d be arrested for making all those 911 calls. I’d probably have some complaints about stalking as well.
He could have easily slipped in his gumshoees on the wet grass.
"All"? You mean all 10 he's made in the last year?
When the truth comes out - the MSM will drop this.
When there’s a mass murder, what happens? The first thing the press does is speculate the killer is a ‘right winger’... and he never is - it’s always a radical Muslim.
Then the MSM labels the killer a ‘lone wolf’ even if the guy is screaming allah akbar and telling the world he’s part of AlQaeda? They hate us. They protect Muslims, blacks, gays, criminals, gang members, drug addicts,etc, etc.... We’re the ONLY people the MSM hates - middle class working, traditional Americans.
When the press has to eat crow, they don’t. They just get quiet and move on. They never apologize - and they won’t on this one either.
This is a link to elite journalist taking when they don’t know a conservative is in the room taping. It’ll make you sick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBFOmUXR080
Indeed. And the converese picture of Zimmerman clubbing baby seals to death.
Let’s ponder the evidence then.
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.html
Listen to call 1, that’s George’s only call.
Point 1: Where at any point in this call does george say “f***ing coons”?
Point 2: George begins to run after the suspect or at least give pursuit at faster than walking pace. The operator asks him are you following him. Yes, replies George. Ok, we don’t need you to do that. OK. He ran - past tense implies that Trayvon got away as opposed to he’s running which was stated earlier. The running stops, this is apparent because the noise of running stops. George obeyed the request.
At this point the operator asks where do you want to meet the officers and George says something about his truck. I am going to theorize that at this point George would be returning to his truck, because he is no longer chasing Martin, and I expect that he intended to meet the police there, however, this is my speculation.
In the very least we know that at this time he was no longer running after Martin, and he also stated that martin “ran”.
I cannot and will not state that Zimmerman started any sort of violent confrontation by evidence of this phone call.
A stalking case has to be built with multiple incidents over a period of time.
Following someone isnot a crime, furthermore, George broke off the follow upon request of the 911 operator.
Listen to the call.
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.html
Call 1
We need a neighborhood map with: entrances, crime scene, convenience store, Trayvon’s residence, Zimmerman’s pickup location, first sighting....
What do you think?
“I cannot agree that Zimmerman was the aggressor”, I too believe Trayvon’s case is weak, and getting weaker still for the race pimps lining up on his side.
Thanks for the ping. As usual, your post is excellent.
“their rate of violence towards whites is so much higher than the reverse it’s basically incalculable”
And we won’t hear much about that because it doesn’t fit the MSM agenda.
“whether or not Zimmerman was wrong doesn’t matter to me anymore”
I’m feeling the same way actually. The fact that this is a huge sensationlized media piece is enough for me to realize the race baiters, the media, the celebrities, the politicians speaking about this incident care nothing about anyone involved or the issues that make the climate what it is today. They aren’t interested in any factual information.
Personally, I don’t need a map, but I expect that we will have one eventually.
All the evidence needed to dispute the media manufactured version of events is right there in that recorded call.
Thia Florida circus being about Obama and his using the White House to promote the Derrick Bell/Separatist teaching? That Reverend Wright was right, after all?
I agree, again. Absence of Map notwithstanding.
O.K. You're entitled to your opinion.
But has it occurred to you to ask "Why is this suddenly news, when it happened a month ago (Feb 26)?" The story was fully-reported locally, yet there were no protests at the time, nor any political issues raised.
So, why did it go national four weeks later? And why was the eyewitness testimony -- which led the local story -- left out of the initial accounts?
Who decided that the media should re-circulate the story four weeks after the fact? And why? In other words, "Who sought to...and is using...you?"
O.K. You're entitled to your opinion.
But has it occurred to you to ask "Why is this suddenly news, when it happened a month ago (Feb 26)?" The story was fully-reported locally, yet there were no protests at the time, nor any political issues raised.
So, why did it go national four weeks later? And why was the eyewitness testimony -- which led the local story -- left out of the initial accounts?
Who decided that the media should re-circulate the story four weeks after the fact? And why? In other words, "Who sought to...and is using...you?"
Why is it suddenly national news -- four weeks after it was a routine local news story that evidently aroused no hackles or contention?
And, when re-circulated nationally, a key eyewitness account was left out -- an eyewitness account that actually led in the local story?
Surely, you understand why these questions need to be asked?
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.