Calling 911 is taking action on an observation - oh no the manual contradicts itself.
Can you point out where exactly it says not to keep someone under observation?
Can you also point out where it says keeping someone under observation is taking action on itself? lol
I can't wait.
Zimmerman was part of his neighborhood's NW program. And was a block Captain. He was not the only one.
This particular program was not registered, but there is no requirement for it to be.
The puplication that the quoted statement, came from, has no force behind it.
It is nothing more than a suggestion, or a guideline. It is not a rule or a law that has to be followed.
And obviously, the quoted portion doesn't even apply here.
Do you have any thing substantive to add?
If you do, I would really like to hear it.
The two two statements in evidence for that moment come from Zimmerman and Trayvon's girlfriend.
Unless you are calling Trayvon's girlfriend a liar along with Zimmerman? Are you?
So what is your point with this irrelevant and false information?
there was NO official neighborhood watch group. HE invented it. HE made himself the "captain". HE was the only member.
this was just part of his long line of bull**** actions, including being rejected by the police force and calling 911 forty times in January, that makes his actions and words soo very suspect.
An allegation coming from a witness or one involved, is evidence.
And his statement is consistent with the other evidence, and, according to the Chief:
They had all eight witness's testimony. Even the woman who believes it was Trayvon yelling for help, who's version is contradicted by others."The evidence and testimony we have so far does not establish that Mr. Zimmerman did not act in self defense. We don't have anything to dispute his claim of self-defense, at this point, with the evidence and testimony that we have," Lee said.Fatal shooting of Florida teen turned over to state attorney - CNN.com
And still, "We don't have anything to dispute his claim of self-defense, at this point, with the evidence and testimony that we have".
Don't you understand why I included that he wasn't the only one?
It was to stop mis-informed people from making the claims you just made.
I can back up what I said.
Let me show you how really biased and misinformed your position is.
No, but they are heresay.Provided Quotes are not speculation.
The original report will be scrutinized thoroughly to determine if it was a proper initial investigation. We will have to wait and see the outcome of that to determine how valid it is.The police report is not speculation.
Eye Witnesses are traditionally unreliable. That is why as compelling as they are pre trial of anything, they are usually not relied on much anymore over forensics and other methods of scientific fact based evidence.The quotes from the on scene eye-witness is not speculation.
911 calls can sink him as well as provide information of mitigation. We don't know fully yet.Quotes from the 911 calls are not speculation.
Still heresay.....All she can provide is what Treyvon said to her over the phone, she wasn't there.Quotes from Trayvons girlfriend are not speculation.
Well, I want more before I say that a dead youth is justified.This is the known evidence.
That is what we have.
No, something substantial, and concrete will do. You are talking about the justification of taking the life of someone's child.Do we need to go over each and every one again for their establishment?
I don't think that is true. Ask anyone in here, and the position I am taking as of now, is quite opposite what seem to be the norm of my usual friends, and compatriots here. Maybe it is true that Politics makes strange bedfellows, but something about this to me just stinks.I have been trying to avoid all supposition and speculation because of where it leads.
And for the most part, do so.
But I have at times, because apparently, at this forum, you have to.
We are not a court here, and you are free to consider anything you wish, but I certainly hope that goes for me as well....Evidence is evidence. It doesn't need to be entered into any trial to be evidence.
Have you ever heard of evidence not being admitted by the Judge? It was still evidence, it just not able to be admitted at trial for specific reasons.
But if you prefer we can use the term 'information', but that term is what is usually used for charging a person.
How so? is there a document, or anything stating that he was a member of the Neighborhood Watch?Now this is actually "arguing selected portions of speculation given by media sources".
But, it isn't true.
Who knows if Zimmerman is telling the truth? I don't?The 911 dispatcher, made a "suggestion", that Zimmerman had no obligation to follow.
As a side note, Zimmerman at one point must have stop following Zimmerman. According to the evidence, Zimmerman was on his way back to his truck. That would mean he wasn't following him doesn't it?
Getting out of his vehicle to pursue on foot is beyond what I would think is reasonable under the circumstances.Zimmerman following a suspicious person to keep him under observation until police arrive is not wrong and does not any anyway make Zimmerman the aggressor.
That is your opinion.I do not know how when you got them all wrong, and the known evidence doesn't support that conclusion.
Which do not make sense...Which was it? Did Treyvon approach him asking why Zimmerman was following, or did Treyvon attack from behind? The two are not in sync with each other.Two statements.
The evidence states that Trayvon confronted Zimmerman first with a question. First contact.
Zimmerman's statement says Trayvon attacked from behind. Again, first contact.
That doesn't match the impression that you are giving of this case.I am sure that we do not have all the evidence that the police and prosecution does.
Much of what we have is heresay from the shooter himself...I want more.But that is not the known evidence available to us is it?
And that is what we are talking about here. The evidence as known by us. The known evidence.
Not known to them, but known to us.
Another clue is that the State and Federal investigations have been launched to question that conclusion.Obviously what the police have, that they clued us into, as evidenced from the Police Chief's quoted statements, was that what they had wasn't enough to bring charges. That's the clue.
Look, I don't know if Zimmerman is guilty of anything or not. That is not what I am arguing. What I am saying is that look. put yourself into this 17yr. old's shoes. You go to the store, you are on your way home walking through a neighborhood, it is drizzling so your hoodie is up, and you are talking to your girlfriend on the phone as you walk. Then a car starts shadowing you as you walk, so you tell your girlfriend about it as you look at the driver. Then you start to run because you have no idea what the hell this guy wants, and he gets out and starts chasing you...What the hell you supposed to do?That is part of the evidence we are discussing, right?
The evidence that they have, and we do not, was not enough to bring charges.
That is the evidence we have.
Please tell me what you do not understand about that?
Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
Alexis de Tocqueville
It's a claim and that is all it is.
And as j-mac pointed out - this is where we get into the realm of "arguing selected portions of speculation given by media sources."
I've seen it reported as 46 calls, 9 of which were calls of suspicion, since January 1st, and reported as 46 calls since January of last year, which averages out to 3 calls a month.
So which one should we choose to accept as real?
And since only nine of those calls were for someone or something suspicious.
Just how does that make his words suspicious?
Take your time. I didn't realize the time. I have to go out, but I will be back.
Last edited by Excon; 03-24-12 at 06:47 PM.
I would LOVE for someone to explain to me, why we should trust one thing Zimmerman says.
Considering his history of beating cops, beating women, obsessively calling 911, and now baselessly accusing Martin of being on drugs and scoping out houses, of being an asshole and being a "****ing punk", I see no reason to consider his statement.