- Joined
- Dec 22, 2009
- Messages
- 4,138
- Reaction score
- 807
- Location
- Volunteer State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Doesn't matter how good he was, ex-police chief is a bold face liar, period.Yeah, in "YOUR" book....which actually means ****
The exChief at Sanford PD (former captain) is one of the most thorough individuals who ever investigated a crime.
He came out publicly to proclaim that all the evidence and witness accounts supported Zimmerman's claim of self-defense and that Zimmerman's accounts remained consistent throughout. We now know for absolute certainty that this is a lie because Zimmerman's own account druing the various police interviews and the on-site video reenactment are inconsistent with his police non-emergency call.
In his police interview audio and renactment video, Zimmerman put words in the dispatcher's mouth to lay blame on the dispatcher in explaining away why he did what he did such as getting out of his vehicle (to find the exact address allegedly required by the dispatcher) and more.
The only thing consistent about Zimmerman as these video/audio evidence showed is this pattern of laying blames on other people for whatever Zimmerman did. Anything that went wrong Zimmerman is never at fault.
There are many more inconsistent in his reenactment that had been pointed out before, such as the location he said he was punched and pushed down and the claim that Trayvon covered his mouth and nose during the fight on the ground before the shot was fired.
But, Trayvon's body was found 50 feet south of the T-junction; that no Zimmerman's nose blood was transfered to Trayvon's hand and that no muffling sound was ever heard in the background of a witness' 911 call.
I know many of you had tried to explain away the inconsistencies. But, if you have to have the need to explain away the glaring inconsistencies, then they are inconsistencies no mater how much effort you try to convince people.
The most one can say is say nothing.
But, to come out and proclaim, in ex-chief's own words, "because no evidence contradict his story" this is a bold face lie.
I know many of you will not agree with me no matter how much discrepancies from the evidence I laid them out for you to see. That's why I said, "In my book" when I called the ex-chief a bold face liar with reasons.
I didn't beat you down for your belief according to your book, so why do you think you should feel the need to disparage my opinion based on the evidence that had been released?