Posted on 03/25/2012 12:30:48 PM PDT by Steelfish
Witness: Zimmerman 'Never ... Tried To Help' Trayvon Martin
By NBC News, msnbc.com staff and news services
A woman who says she and her roommate witnessed the final moments of Trayvon Martin's life told Dateline NBC that George Zimmerman had "his hands pressed on his back" and "never turned him over or tried to help him."
Zimmerman's lawyer, when shown part of the interview being aired Sunday night on Dateline, emphasized that his client would be claiming self-defense.
"I think there were efforts made to render aid to Trayvon," Craig Sonner told NBC's TODAY show.
Mary Cutcher told Dateline that she and her roommate both saw Zimmerman "straddling the body, basically a foot on both sides of Trayvon's body, and his hands pressed on his back."
Cutcher added that Zimmerman told her and her roommate to call the police. "Zimmerman never turned him over or tried to help him or CPR or anything," Cutcher said.
Sonner also reiterated what he had said in recent days, that Zimmerman suffered a broken nose and a gash to the back of his head.
A friend of Zimmerman's who appeared on TODAY with Sonner added that Zimmerman, 28, was distraught over the teen's death.
"Right after the shooting he couldn't stop crying," said Joe Oliver, who is African American and a former TV reporetr and anchor in Orlando.
Zimmerman has not been charged in the Feb. 26 shooting that has ignited racial tensions and raised questions about the Sanford police's handling of the case. Martin was black, and Zimmerman's father is white and his mother is Hispanic.
In a separate interview Sunday, Oliver said that "I'm a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color.''
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.msnbc.msn.com ...
None of those contentions is supported by the Gartner case.
-- In all instances it was a reference to a FLEEING felon. ... --
Yes. That's what the Garner case is about, with the slight difference being that deadly force may be used against a fleeing suspect, who may or may not be a felon in fact.
-- But having dug a hole, you are now trying to twist things around and shoehorn scenarios to accommodate a FLEEING felon or suspect and one who actually has threatened serious imminent harm ... --
I don't know why you put FLEEING in all caps, but that was your initial premise, that is the situation in the Garner case, and my remarks have been limited to that circumstance.
The disconnect is between what you say the Gartner case stands for, and what the Garner case actually says. The Garner case allows the police to use deadly force to bring down an unarmed fleeing felon, but it conditions the circumstances. In contrast, your assertion, quoted above was "the cops can't use deadly force to bring down an unarmed fleeing felon." Your own cite, Gartner, contradicts your assertion.
Maybe you need sleep or something. Others may feel free to take you at your word, but I won't. Your credibility stinks.
“NSA has no information indicating the community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the NSA Neighborhood Watch program.”
A statement released by the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) — the parent organization of USAonWatch-Neighborhood Watch — it has been revealed that Zimmerman was not a member of any group recognized by the organization.
Zimmerman violated the central tenets of Neighborhood Watch by following Martin, confronting him and carrying a concealed weapon.
Carmen Caldwell, the Executive Director of Citizens’ Crime Watch of Miami-Dade: “In no program that I have ever heard of does someone patrol with a gun in their pocket. Every city and municipality has their own policies. Here in Miami-Dade we train people only to be the eyes and ears of their communities. Not to follow and most definitely not to carry a weapon.”
http://www.thegrio.com/specials/trayvon-martin/zimmerman-not-a-member-of-recognized-neighborhood-watch-organization.php?page=1
The kind of volunteer security detail involved in this case creates all sorts of concerns and potential for liability.
In the Martin case, some questions for the HOA Board might be:
• Did the board request the creation of this Neighborhood Watch?
• Did the board appoint the volunteers?
• Was the board kept apprised of the Neighborhood Watch’s activities?
• Did the board know that Zimmerman and perhaps other members of the Neighborhood Watch were patrolling the community armed?
• Did the board screen any of the volunteers including Zimmerman to determine that they were mentally and physically fit to serve this function? - Donna DiMaggio Berger, Esq.
Do you have proof Zimmerman did anything criminal?
Game over.
Or maybe Martin was playing the ‘knock out game’ with Zimmerman. Too bad for him Zimmerman didn’t give his permission. Guess we’ll never know now.
Here’s what DMZTahoe would probably say (translated):
Well, no, but I don’t like what he did a single bit!
Good point, but opens up more questions.
If Martin was this strong young brute, wailing away at Zimmerman, he would have knocked him unconscious
So Zimmerman is screaming, someone hears him and says they were going to call 911.
If Martin ignored the threat of 911 and continued to wail away, Zimmerman would never have been able to get his gun.
So, what if Martin heard the warnings of 911, got up to run, and that is when Zimmerman was able to draw, aim and fire?
More questions at this time then answers, so everyone should refrain from deciding who is to blame. But like a nose, everyone has an opinion.
But it hasn’t been established yet that Zimmerman was on patrol...wasn’t he doing something else and noted the guy there?
bump
If he was jumped from behind (widely speculated because of wound on back of his head and this John guy, but not proven in any fashion one way or the other as that wound could come from head hitting the ground), then it's likely going to work in his favor.
I saw the police report
What we know is this. 1. There was an altercation and a shooting. This is a manslaughter investigation.
2. Zimmerman was taken to the station and interviewed (interrogated). We do not know what he said. We won't know at this time.
3. He was detained (handcuffed) and released after his interview. Detained does not mean arrested, but he was likely given his Miranda warnings so his statements won't be suppressed if he said something to incriminate himself.
4. He was not charged when released. That means either there is not enough evidence for there to be probable cause for an arrest or SPD/DA's don't think they can get a conviction at that time. That may or may not change in the future with new developments. A grand jury is being convened as well.
Get real. A black kid is walking down the sidewalk in a predominently white neighborhood. He notices a car, with a man driving, following him. Ya think he might get a little concerned, frightened and take a detour to lose the tail?
Using your logic, why didn't Zimmerman pull up alongside the kid and ask him what he was doing?
Think he was on an errand of some kind, noticed the deceased and decided to tail him.
And walking with skittles and a soda is a crime in Florida?
Game over.
What? You playing with yourself?
You keep constructing your own scaffold. I may need some sleep but you need a lesson in grammar and reading case law.
“The Garner case allows the police to use deadly force to bring down an unarmed fleeing felon, but it conditions the circumstances.”
Go read my initial comment where I wrote: You cannot use deadly force to repel a non-deadly attack.
Of course, if the circumstances change (where the fleeing suspect becomes a deadly threat, as where he turns back and confronts his pursuer) then the initial equation changes. This is much is obvious even to a fool that is does not require a thesis.
The moral of this exchange is that in future don’t go running around accusing people of their credibility and making a fool of yourself unless you get your facts (and law) correct.
All we know is that there was a suspension for something.
The bullet forensics should be highly informative here (distance, trajectory, etc).
Good point. Agree. Let the investigation, a fair one, play out.
From the City Manager’s statement:
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Zimmerman_Martin_shooting.pdf
“Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the Sanford Police Department.
If you're frightened by/afraid of someone, you don't then stalk and jump them, pummelling them mercilessly.
What planet do you live on?
Of course it does. But so what? The Garner case allows the police to use deadly force against a fleeing felon, if the police believe allowing the escape will put the public at risk. That the fleeing felon turn to put the police at imminent risk is not required, in order to justify the use of deadly force against a fleeing, unarmed felon. That is what the case says.
-- The moral of this exchange is that in future don't go running around accusing people of their credibility and making a fool of yourself unless you get your facts (and law) correct. --
Well, I'll say it again. Your credibility sucks, and so does your reading comprehension.
Looks like you need an elementary class in English 101. I take it you had an public high school education in Compton or in the Bronx. How else would you continue to write this stuff:
“The Garner case allows the police to use deadly force against a fleeing felon, if the police believe allowing the escape will put the public at risk.”
Damn, it, for the 1000th time, in such a case the fleeing felon is now threatening lethal force and any one with an ounce of intelligence knows the answer to that. So you shift you stand by positing an obvious circumstance to which the answer is a given. Nice try. This ain’t so much about credibility but a lack of reading comprehension on your part.
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.