He also made a point, several times, that dispatchers are taught to NOT give orders, because doing so exposes the city to liability. Sean was fairly emphatic that what he said to Zimmerman was not in the nature of an order.
I don't know where in the spectrum of "unequivocal - equivocal" the term "advised" falls, and i think the paper is allowing the reader to substitute "ordered" for "advised."
Interesting facts.
What I meant by “equivocal” in this case was that the dispatcher’s “advisory” could be interpreted in more than one way.
It’s clear that the dispatcher, the prosecutor, and most of the MSM chose to believe that saying “we don’t need you to do that” is equivalent to saying “we advise you not to do that”. But, that’s not what the words say. If Zimmerman chose a literal interpretation; he would be given to understand that the dispatcher (and, by extension, the police) didn’t “need” him to follow Martin. Zimmerman could have responded to that literal interpretation with something like: “Oh, I don’t mind keeping track of him for you anyhow”. Perhaps, that’s what Zimmerman was thinking, in the heat of the moment. As I said before, such ambiguous, or equivocal language causes planes to crash.