FOX host Sean Hannity confirms off-the-record talk with George Zimmerman

NY Daily News ^ | April 11, 2012 | Philip Caulfield

[rightwingintelligentsia]

FOX News host Sean Hannity confirmed on his show Tuesday night he had an off-the-record chat with someone he believed was George Zimmerman.

The neighborhood watchman's former legal team announced they would no longer represent him because the 28-year-old had ignored their calls and said he had reached out to Hannity and special prosecutor Angela Corey on his own.

On his show, Hannity said he wanted to "set the record straight."

"For a few weeks we have been pursuing an interview with Mr. Zimmerman to give him a chance to tell his side of the story," the host said. “Now yesterday I was contacted by an individual that we in fact believe was George Zimmerman.”

"We spoke on the phone about his case, and I agreed not to report on the contents of that conversation. That's it."

[Lazamataz]

Thanks for the affirmative answer. I figured.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Zimmerman's conscience is driving his actions. He is seeking to unburden himself to someone who will listen.

So he forced Tray-von to punch him in the face, he forced Tray-von to beat him and slam his head into the ground, and forced Tray-von to try to steal his gun, eh?

[Cyber Liberty]

Yeah, I figured that out too. Ignored my “cracker” crack.

[GraceG]

THEY ARE GOING TO USE THIS TO TRY TO TAKE DOWN HANNITY.

[Rooivalk]

You are the one getting it twisted. Zimmerman reported Martin acting suspiciously, and left his vehicle to maintain visual contact so that police could find Martin when they arrived.

Sadly you grasp at straws to support your position. Just what did "acting suspiciously" mean to Zimmerman? Were you there that night? At least tell me the crime in progress Zimmerman observed that supports his actions.

All we have is Zimmerman's self serving account of someone "acting suspiciously" as his rational for encountering someone walking down the street

Is that the best you Zimmerman supporters can come up with?

There is no law against “leaving your vehicle”, and any reason for doing so does not have to be approved of by Rooivalk.

Shooting and killing an unarmed person because in your mind, they were "acting suspiciously", sure is against the law.

Again tell me what crime was Zimmerman observing when he left his car to accost Martin. Give that a try.

But we both know you have no answer for that. None of you Zimmerman supporters have that answer

[vette6387]

Unfortunately,God isn’t going to “try” George Zimmerman, Holder and “his people” will get the nod. if I were him, I’d be applying for citizenship in a country that does not have an extradition treaty with ours. There is just no way for him to get anything resembling a fair trial here. This isn’t about a search for the truth, but rather a black lynch mob wanting some sort of revenge irreective of the facts.

[who knows what evil?]

Zimmerman is getting a ride on the PC Railroad...there is no law here...the situation is being controlled by two groups...the agitators, and those who wish to be agitated. Letter of the law? Please.

[Rooivalk]

So he forced Tray-von to punch him in the face, he forced Tray-von to beat him and slam his head into the ground, and forced Tray-von to try to steal his gun, eh?

Total BS. Stop trying to fabricate things that are not in evidence in the chain of events for the night of the shooting.

The facts are that two people witnessed the full range of events on the night of the shooting and thanks to Zimmerman one side cannot tell their version of those events

Or maybe you are suggesting that Martin had no version of how things went down

Please tell me you are not that dumb and silly

[E. Pluribus Unum]

There were two eyewitnesses. Their story does not fit with your bizarre narrative of a racist Whitey hunting down an innocent ten-year old child, so you ignore it.

[trappedincanuckistan]

“Sadly you grasp at straws to support your position. Just what did “acting suspiciously” mean to Zimmerman? Were you there that night? At least tell me the crime in progress Zimmerman observed that supports his actions.”

Read the transcript. It explains what Zimmerman thought was suspicious. Were you there that night?

“All we have is Zimmerman’s self serving account of someone “acting suspiciously” as his rational for encountering someone walking down the street.”

You’re right. That’s all we have. So why are you making things up to fill in the blanks?

“Shooting and killing an unarmed person because in your mind, they were “acting suspiciously”, sure is against the law.”

Prove that that’s what happened.

“Again tell me what crime was Zimmerman observing when he left his car to accost Martin. Give that a try.”

He doesn’t have to be observing a crime to report someone or to leave his vehicle.

“But we both know you have no answer for that. None of you Zimmerman supporters have that answer”

Why would I answer questions based on fallacies and speculation? And I’m not a “Zimmerman” supporter. That’s your problem. You’ve chosen a side and are completely immune to logic, reason, or evidence.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Why I Called George Zimmerman a Murderer, and Why I Was Wrong

[Rooivalk]

Unfortunately,God isn’t going to “try” George Zimmerman, Holder and “his people” will get the nod. if I were him, I’d be applying for citizenship in a country that does not have an extradition treaty with ours. There is just no way for him to get anything resembling a fair trial here.

So you don't believe God rules this mortal world? Better get into that Bible friend. You need to do some reading

This isn’t about a search for the truth, but rather a black lynch mob wanting some sort of revenge irreective of the facts.

"Black lynch mob?" Last time I looked people of all races were praying for a just outcome in this case. What's with this "Black lynch mob" thing?

[wtc911]

Having a name like Travon and being negro is not a defense

____________________________

But it is, based on too many freeper posts, a reason to assume that he's guilty of attacking zimmerman...in spite of the lack of any eyewitness account that says this happened.

[Gertie]

Have the burglaries in that “gated community” stopped or is that still going on? Why did Travon have women's jewelery and burglars tools.

[Rooivalk]

There were two eyewitnesses. Their story does not fit with your bizarre narrative of a racist Whitey hunting down an innocent ten-year old child, so you ignore it.

Once again having no facts to support your ideas you attempt to introduce the notion of race into the discussion

This is about right and wrong. And Zimmerman seems by his actions of fleeing is bowing to that notion of having innocent blood on his hands

You know that history is filled with the accounts of individuals who have been driven mad by deeds they have done in the dark thinking that the truth would never see the light of day.

Zimmerman is not the first nor will he be the last

[trappedincanuckistan]

“Once again having no facts to support your ideas”

Pot calling the kettle black. ROFL.

[Greysard]

All we have is Zimmerman's self serving account of someone "acting suspiciously" as his rational for encountering someone walking down the street

Both were in public space and were free to "encounter" each other however they want, short of physically assaulting one another. Trayvon had no right to fight Zimmerman; hitting someone's head against the concrete is an attempted murder. There are wounds on Zimmerman and no wounds, besides the bullet hole, on Trayvon. This tells us how the unarmed phase of the confrontation unfolded.

Shooting and killing an unarmed person because in your mind, they were "acting suspiciously", sure is against the law.

That particular strawman would matter only if Zimmerman approached Trayvon and shot him. However obviously that's not how it happened. By the time of the fatal shot Trayvon was assaulting Zimmerman to the point that it became a danger for his life. Zimmerman had no help and had no other way to stop the attack except to shoot the attacker.

It is important to understand that all actions of both parties before Trayvon's first strike landed are IMMATERIAL. Both Zimmerman leaving his car, and Trayvon walking (in any way, suspiciously or not) do not matter - these were legal actions done legally by both men. The only thing that matters is the physical altercation. In this phase Trayvon was the attacker because he hit Zimmerman, brought him down and continued the assault when Zimmerman, already on his back, couldn't possibly fight.

The only way here for Zimmerman to be guilty is if he started the fight. Not by following - he had to do the first strike. Then he becomes an attacker, and Trayvon becomes the defending party. Let's see what the physical evidence from the Coroner's office shows.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

And Zimmerman seems by his actions of fleeing is bowing to that notion of having innocent blood on his hands

Zimmerman hasn't fled, you liar. He called the prosecutor. She can find him any time she wants.

The New Black KKK has a $10,000 bounty on him, "dead or alive."

Would you show your face in public if the New Black KKK were hunting for you?

You are such a slimey liar.

[Rooivalk]

I've seen nothing of the kind. Nobody thinks he should be exonerated if the evidence shows he murdered somebody.

So why the attempt to slander Martin as a "criminal: and "thug"?

We'd just like to see some evidence before he's lynched.

I would like to see some evidence that supports posting pictures of someone who was not Martin with a mouth full of gold teeth to create the illusion that Martin was a street thug who deserved to die at the hands of Zimmerman. What was that all about?

If you were a rational person (a leap I am not prepared to make), you would want that too.

If you believe the words you posted then surely you realize that there are two sides to this shooting and that Martin cannot tell his side of the story.

The question is why are people like you so eager to accept Zimmerman's version without understanding the whole chain of events.

Yours is the side that wants a rush to judgement and execute the man without benefit of facts, so take your silly straw man and go home.

Please show me where in any post I have called for the execution of Zimmerman. I think you are confused and upset with the recent turn of events that now is showing your man Zimmerman to be not exactly the up standing person you thought him to be.

By trying to run Zimmerman is showing his true character and pointing questions as to his innocence in this matter

[trappedincanuckistan]

I would like to see some evidence that supports posting pictures of someone who was not Martin with a mouth full of gold teeth to create the illusion that Martin was a street thug who deserved to die at the hands of Zimmerman. What was that all about?

The pictures of Martin with a mouth full of gold teef are verifiably Trayvon Martin.