The Timeline Discrepancy Resolved

Grim17 said:

Congratulations Simon... You've managed to silence the regular Zimmerman bashers, as their absence from this thread displays.

Click to expand...

A version of that post silenced the discussion of the timeline on another board as well. Just dropped away like a brick.

Grim17 said:

Congratulations Simon... You've managed to silence the regular Zimmerman bashers, as their absence from this thread displays.

Click to expand...

Yep. I love me some GZ.

It's possible this particular issue isn't as important to most.

Simon W. Moon said:

A version of that post silenced the discussion of the timeline on another board as well. Just dropped away like a brick.

Click to expand...

I think the hard timelines screw Z.

Especially the 7:09 start time.

Means he was doing SOMETHING for almost two minutes OTHER than walking back to his truck.

(Anybody see anything in the evidence dumps pertaining to location services records?. They used them in the Anthony trial to show where she was when. Id REALLY like to see them for the time in question. Ms too. And Air Marshal buddy too.)

What if...? said:

I think the hard timelines screw Z.

Especially the 7:09 start time.

Means he was doing SOMETHING for almost two minutes OTHER than walking back to his truck.

(Anybody see anything in the evidence dumps pertaining to location services records?. They used them in the Anthony trial to show where she was when. Id REALLY like to see them for the time in question. Ms too. And Air Marshal buddy too.)

Click to expand...

By TM's phone records and Dee's testimony I don't see how it is possible the call started at 7:09 but as you point out if it did, there are more problems for GZ.

What if...? said:

(Anybody see anything in the evidence dumps pertaining to location services records?. They used them in the Anthony trial to show where she was when. Id REALLY like to see them for the time in question. Ms too. And Air Marshal buddy too.)

Click to expand...

Idk. I think that the phrasing was vague enough to cover text messages as well. "telecommunication records"? Idk. I don't recall exactly. But it was some vague phrase that sounds like it could cover a wide variety of records.

Furiounova said:

The last call on TM's phone started at 7:12 pm and this is important because according to Dee's testimony he didn't run away from GZ until after that call was made. Judging by her testimony it looks like TM ran between 7:13-7:14 and that matches the 7:11 start time.

Click to expand...

MB Civic » Chilling Transcript of Trayvon Martin Girlfriend’s interview with Police
So according to Dee Dee and TM's phone records Dee Dee is saying that TM ran BEFORE the 7:12 call started.

So it seems that you're wrong about this part in particular:
"according to Dee's testimony he didn't run away from GZ until after that call [the 7:12 call] was made"

It seems that according to her testimony he ran BEFORE that call was made.


There's nothing unreasonable or objectionable in post #26, is there?


ftr i haven't read the rest of whatever is at the link I provided. I found the transcript. Found the section I was looking for and then came to post it. I may go back and read it later. idk.
; )

Simon W. Moon said:

MB Civic » Chilling Transcript of Trayvon Martin Girlfriend’s interview with Police

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. He ran. That’s when the phone hung up.
PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry?
GIRLFRIEND: The phone hung up and I called him back again.​

So according to Dee Dee and TM's phone records Dee Dee is saying that TM ran BEFORE the 7:12 call started.

So it seems that you're wrong about this part in particular:
"according to Dee's testimony he didn't run away from GZ until after that call [the 7:12 call] was made"

It seems that according to her testimony he ran BEFORE that call was made.


There's nothing unreasonable or objectionable in post #26, is there?


ftr i haven't read the rest of whatever is at the link I provided. I found the transcript. Found the section I was looking for and then came to post it. I may go back and read it later. idk.
; )

Click to expand...

No I am not wrong. if you read more of her testimony you will see that is when she said he ran to get under the shelter of the clubhouse. The phone disconnected and she immediately called back at 7:12. It was after that call was connected she said TM ran away from GZ.

This is part you are referencing:

GIRLFRIEND: It started raining.

PROSECUTOR: It started raining, and did he go somewhere?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, he ran to the, um, mail thing.

PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry what?

GIRLFRIEND: Like a mail, like a shed.

PROSECUTOR: Like a mail area, like a covered area, because it was raining? So did he tell you he was already inside, like, the gated place?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. He ran. That’s when the phone hung up.

PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry?

GIRLFRIEND: The phone hung up and I called him back again.

It was after that TM runs away from GZ:

PROSECUTOR: Go to what?

GIRLFRIEND: Run to his dad’s house.

PROSECUTOR: To his dad’s house?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. So he said he was about to run from the back, so the next that I hear, he just run. I can hear that the wind blowing.

PROSECUTOR: So you could tell he was running at that time? OK. And then
what happened?

GIRLFRIEND: Then he said, he lost him.

You should go back and read it more because you were looking for something to prove me wrong with versus simply reading the transcript. You made the mistake of not knowing she said he ran to get out of the rain before he ran to get away from GZ.

It should also be noted she contradicts GZ claim TM was casually walking in the rain.

Furiounova said:

It should also be noted she contradicts GZ claim TM was casually walking in the rain.

Click to expand...

Not sure that is true. Could have GZ observed TM before the calls to D?

mike2810 said:

Not sure that is true. Could have GZ observed TM before the calls to D?

Click to expand...

I'm only talking about what is recorded. In his call he claims TM was just casually walking in the rain and never mentions TM taking cover from the rain. He obviously left that part out because there is nothing suspicious about someone standing in a well lit area under shelter when it just started to rain.

Some have assumed GZ meant to say "1111 RVC" at the beginning of his call but I don't see it that way. It looks to me like GZ followed him in his vehicle from 111 RVC to the clubhouse. TM would have been crossing the area of 111 RVC coming back from 7/11. GZ drove from 111 to 1111 while TM was walking on the sidewalk going through the middle of the complex.

Furiounova said:

You should go back and read it more because you were looking for something to prove me wrong with versus simply reading the transcript.

Click to expand...

I was looking for what I half remembered about them having many phone calls because the connection always crappy.
I didn't realize that she lost connection to TM twice in that time period--once @ the mailboxes and once again shortly thereafter. Or at least she says that she did.
That strikes me as odd.
Since there're only the two calls that day visible on the snippet of record that I have seen, I s'pose it's possible that TM could have been talking about GZ before the 7:04 call.
I would expect there to be three calls since she says she was disconnected twice before the final disconnection.

Furiounova said:

You made the mistake of not knowing she said he ran to get out of the rain before he ran to get away from GZ.

Click to expand...

I've not really been interested in what she has to say yet.

Furiounova said:

It should also be noted she contradicts GZ claim TM was casually walking in the rain.

Click to expand...

Well, like with a number of the apparent contradictions, it's easily resolved if we allow that there were different things going on at different times. Maybe TM was strolling at one point, running at one point, and skipping at another.

I am not sure what to make of the apparent timeline snafu you have presented.
Maybe she's not being a good witness somehow.
Maybe GZ's account is funny somehow.
Maybe I am just plain old wrong. If I am, it would be the very first time. Ever.

Furiounova said:

Some have assumed GZ meant to say "1111 RVC" at the beginning of his call but I don't see it that way. It looks to me like GZ followed him in his vehicle from 111 RVC to the clubhouse. TM would have been crossing the area of 111 RVC coming back from 7/11. GZ drove from 111 to 1111 while TM was walking on the sidewalk going through the middle of the complex.

Click to expand...

AFAICT, the 1100's are the lowest numbers on that street.

Simon W. Moon said:

AFAICT, the 1100's are the lowest numbers on that street.

Click to expand...

You may be correct. earlier I had punched in 111 RVC in my maps app and it came up with a push pin exact location. Need to look again.

Simon W. Moon said:

I was looking for what I half remembered about them having many phone calls because the connection always crappy.
I didn't realize that she lost connection to TM twice in that time period--once @ the mailboxes and once again shortly thereafter. Or at least she says that she did.
That strikes me as odd.
Since there're only the two calls that day visible on the snippet of record that I have seen, I s'pose it's possible that TM could have been talking about GZ before the 7:04 call.
I would expect there to be three calls since she says she was disconnected twice before the final disconnection.

I've not really been interested in what she has to say yet.
Well, like with a number of the apparent contradictions, it's easily resolved if we allow that there were different things going on at different times. Maybe TM was strolling at one point, running at one point, and skipping at another.

I am not sure what to make of the apparent timeline snafu you have presented.
Maybe she's not being a good witness somehow.
Maybe GZ's account is funny somehow.
Maybe I am just plain old wrong. If I am, it would be the very first time. Ever.

Click to expand...

The 7:04 call was not from her and I think she confused that for a quick disconnection. Someone else from a non T-Mobile # was calling TM and a lot of times you can hear the "clicks" that sound like a disconnection.

Her testimony is valid because she places TM near the clubhouse the same time GZ said he was there. On TM's bill you can see her incoming call at 7:12 pm and it was after that she said TM ran from GZ.

Hate to pop your Wrong Cherry but this hip check will stick. (-:

Furiounova said:

The 7:04 call was not from her...

Click to expand...

How do we know?

Furiounova said:

...and I think she confused that for a quick disconnection. Someone else from a non T-Mobile # was calling TM and a lot of times you can hear the "clicks" that sound like a disconnection.

Click to expand...

Well she says that she called him back twice. So even if she were mistaken, she's going through the procedure to create a new connection to his phone. Shirley, that would require her to expect to hear the ringing and the usual business of initiating a phone call. I don't find that theory about the clicks to be persuasive.

If the 7:04 call was not her, then the 7:12 and the other call which doesn't appear but would have come later would also be her.
Or, perhaps she's not being a good witness

Furiounova said:

Her testimony is valid because she places TM near the clubhouse the same time GZ said he was there.
On TM's bill you can see her incoming call at 7:12 pm and it was after that she said TM ran from GZ.

Click to expand...

This only works if I buy the theory that she doesn't know very much about what phone call to TM's phone is like (and/or is unfamiliar with phones in general).

From what I have seen of today's youth, I would need some pretty strong evidence of that to be convinced that she's not familiar with phones.
Additionally, she purportedly has had many phone conversation with TM. So, she had plenty of opportunity to become familiar with what it's like talking to TM on his phone. Plenty of opportunity to learn to distinguish between other incoming calls and not being able to talk to TM anymore.

I just can't get on board with the "Dee Dee can't tell the difference between a click and being disconnected" theory.
Do phones even click anymore when they're disconnected? My cel phone doesn't and my work phone doesn't.
Isn't that a vestige of the good old days?

I know why you have to have some theory about that though.
Because w/o it, we have three calls between DD and TM w/ GZ in the picture. Examining the phone records we see that it would have spanned more than a dozen minutes or so w/ GZ around.
That certainly does not fit w/ GZ's story or the NEN call and possibly not w/ TM's phone records.

But, just like it's possible that DD's not being good witness, there's the possibility that GZ's not being a good witness either, (or instead). His account of things may have left one or two things out.

Your theory that DD only actually connected to TM's phone one single time doesn't fit with her version of events.
If she's wrong about how many times she connected, I can't help but question the value of her entire testimony.
It seems that adding her to the equation didn't do much to reduce the number of variables and get us closer to a solution. The opposite rather.
Instead of clarifying, it muddied.

I am not sure that her account is more reliable than the SCSO event report.

This is from what is purported to be the whole phone record. Of course the source who told me it was the whole record also asserts that there's something funny w/ it. idk. tldr
anyway
http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf
final page

Simon W. Moon said:

How do we know?
Well she says that she called him back twice. So even if she were mistaken, she's going through the procedure to create a new connection to his phone. Shirley, that would require her to expect to hear the ringing and the usual business of initiating a phone call. I don't find that theory about the clicks to be persuasive.

If the 7:04 call was not her, then the 7:12 and the other call which doesn't appear but would have come later would also be her.
Or, perhaps she's not being a good witness

PROSECUTOR: Like a mail area, like a covered area, because it was raining? So did he tell you he was already inside, like, the gated place?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. He ran. That’s when the phone hung up.

PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry?

GIRLFRIEND: The phone hung up and I called him back again.

...

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, started walking?

GIRLFRIEND: He gonna start walking. And then the phone hung up and then I called him back again. And then, I said, ‘What are you doing?’ He said he’s walking, and he said this man is still following him, behind the car. He put his hoodie on.

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, put his hoodie on?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, ’cause, he said, it was still a little bit dripping water so he put his hoodie on. So I said, ’What’s going on?’ He said, this man is still watching from a car. So he about to run from the back. I told him, go to his dad’s house. Run to his dad’s house.​

This only works if I buy the theory that she doesn't know very much about what phone call to TM's phone is like (and/or is unfamiliar with phones in general).

From what I have seen of today's youth, I would need some pretty strong evidence of that to be convinced that she's not familiar with phones.
Additionally, she purportedly has had many phone conversation with TM. So, she had plenty of opportunity to become familiar with what it's like talking to TM on his phone. Plenty of opportunity to learn to distinguish between other incoming calls and not being able to talk to TM anymore.

I just can't get on board with the "Dee Dee can't tell the difference between a click and being disconnected" theory.
Do phones even click anymore when they're disconnected? My cel phone doesn't and my work phone doesn't.
Isn't that a vestige of the good old days?

I know why you have to have some theory about that though.
Because w/o it, we have three calls between DD and TM w/ GZ in the picture. Examining the phone records we see that it would have spanned more than a dozen minutes or so w/ GZ around.
That certainly does not fit w/ GZ's story or the NEN call and possibly not w/ TM's phone records.

But, just like it's possible that DD's not being good witness, there's the possibility that GZ's not being a good witness either, (or instead). His account of things may have left one or two things out.

Your theory that DD only actually connected to TM's phone one single time doesn't fit with her version of events.
If she's wrong about how many times she connected, I can't help but question the value of her entire testimony.
It seems that adding her to the equation didn't do much to reduce the number of variables and get us closer to a solution. The opposite rather.
Instead of clarifying, it muddied.

I am not sure that her account is more reliable than the SCSO event report.

Click to expand...

We know the 7:04 call wasn't from her based on the phone bill. With T-Mobile, it always notes a call from another T-Mobile phone and at the 7:04 mark it does not say the call came from a T-mobile phone so it couldn't have been dee. Some phones still click on call waiting but obviously I can't say for sure if his did.

Here is her testimony after TM ran to the mailboxes and before TM mentioned GZ:

PROSECUTOR: And what else did Trayvon tell you?

GIRLFRIEND: And like—-

PROSECUTOR: And I know this is difficult for you but just take your time and tell us what you remember happened.

GIRLFRIEND: A couple minutes later, like, he come and tell me this man is watching him.

PROSECUTOR: OK, did he describe the man that was watching him?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, he said white.

PROSECUTOR: OK, did he say whether the man was standing, sitting…?

GIRLFRIEND: He was in a car.

PROSECUTOR: He was in a car? And what did he say about the man who was watching—-

GIRLFRIEND: He was on the phone.

PROSECUTOR: He was on the phone? OK, and what did Trayvon say after that?

GIRLFRIEND: He was telling me that this man was watching him, so he, like, started walking.

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, started walking?

GIRLFRIEND: He gonna start walking. And then the phone hung up and then I called him back again. And then, I said, 'What are you doing?' He said he’s walking, and he said this man is still following him, behind the car. He put his hoodie on.

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, put his hoodie on?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, 'cause, he said, it was still a little bit dripping water so he put his hoodie on. So I said, ’What's going on?’ He said,
this man is still watching from a car. So he about to run from the back. I told him, go to his dad’s house. Run to his dad’s house.

PROSECUTOR: Go to what?

GIRLFRIEND: Run to his dad’s house.

PROSECUTOR: To his dad’s house?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. So he said he was about to run from the back, so the next that I hear, he just run. I can hear that the wind blowing.

PROSECUTOR: So you could tell he was running at that time? OK. And then
what happened?

GIRLFRIEND: Then he said, he lost him.

That matches the phone records because it shows one disconnected/reconnected call at 7:12. So with GZ in the picture there was only one disconnected call according to both Dee's testimony and TM's phone bill.

This part from Dee also matches what GZ said to dispatch:

GIRLFRIEND: He was telling me that this man was watching him, so he, like, started walking.

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, started walking?

GIRLFRIEND: He gonna start walking. And then the phone hung up and then I called him back again. And then, I said, 'What are you doing?' He said he’s walking, and he said this man is still following him, behind the car. He put his hoodie on.

GZ said TM was checking him out and that was just before TM ran so both GZ and Dee state TM was walking just before he ran. We know the phone disconnected at 7:12 at the same time both said TM was walking. After the reconnect TM started running and obviously after 7:12 pm.

Simon W. Moon said:

Of course the source who told me it was the whole record also asserts that there's something funny w/ it. idk. tldr

Click to expand...

There are alleged discrepancies with that document.

Four phones are on that account.
An overlap of time.
The .pdf supposedly displayed records that do not fit the known record format. Indicating that there was tampering by Crump.

And then there is this discrepancy.

Supposedly.
When records are viewed online, local call time appears, but when downloaded, the calls are recorded in Pacific Standard Time.

To get a better understanding, you have to read the following along with all the comments.

Update #11 – Trayvon Martin Shooting – Final Deconstruction of Benjamin Crumps Media Evidence | The Last Refuge

Excon said:

There are alleged discrepancies with that document.

Four phones are on that account.
An overlap of time.
The .pdf supposedly displayed records that do not fit the known record format. Indicating that there was tampering by Crump.

And then there is this discrepancy.

Supposedly.
When records are viewed online, local call time appears, but when downloaded, the calls are recorded in Pacific Standard Time.

To get a better understanding, you have to read the following along with all the comments.

Update #11 – Trayvon Martin Shooting – Final Deconstruction of Benjamin Crumps Media Evidence | The Last Refuge

Click to expand...

The idiots at CTH have been trying to invent numerous idiotic conspiracy theories to defend GZ and this is another example.

Format problem: when downloading, the format on paper may not match the format on the website due to software differences.

PST: When people set up a phone they enter their zip code to determine the time zone needed for billing records. If all calls were in PST regardless of caller location, then it makes no sense a zip code is needed.

calling plans operate on free nights/weekends and this time structure requires accurate call location recording. Does anybody think t mobile customers daily calculate the difference between their location and PST? even after entering a zip code for est the notation on their website remains as a reminder it is the default time zone.

Data usage is the same 24/7 so those records are all in PST.

Furiounova said:

Format problem: when downloading, the format on paper may not match the format on the website due to software differences.

Click to expand...

And that is why they explain why the times are indicated differently.

Furiounova said:

PST: When people set up a phone they enter their zip code to determine the time zone needed for billing records. If all calls were in PST regardless of caller location, then it makes no sense a zip code is needed.

Click to expand...

I do not care if you think it makes "no sense" to you. Take it up with T-moble, not me.
It is clearly stated in the pdf. And confirmed in downloads and calls made to T-mobile.


The readers there, who are not all supporters, tested it.
When downloading, they came in PST format, as indicated. They even called to have it confirmed.
So we actually have a discrepancy that needs to be explained.

Explain why the .pdf reflects an unknown document format, and prove it isn't showing us PST as stated on the form, instead of EST.


It seems that those records are clearly tampered with. By Crump.

Excon said:

And that is why they explain why the times are indicated differently.


I do not care if you think it makes "no sense" to you. Take it up with T-moble, not me.
It is clearly stated in the pdf. And confirmed in downloads and calls made to T-mobile.


The readers there, who are not all supporters, tested it.
When downloading, they came in PST format, as indicated. They even called to have it confirmed.
So we actually have a discrepancy that needs to be explained.

Explain why the .pdf reflects an unknown document format, and prove it isn't showing us PST as stated on the form, instead of EST.


It seems that those records are clearly tampered with. By Crump.

Click to expand...

The idiots at CTH have an agenda and completely fail to look for the facts. They thought they found the holy grail against Crump and completely failed.

The PST notification remains on the web page no matter what time zone customers use. It doesn't mean the calls are actually in PST after a customer sets their account to est which is proven by TM's phone bill. It is freaking hilarious the desperation GZ supporters go to.

It isn't showing PST because we know TM was in EST. We know he was using the phone at the time. We know it shows the same time zone as the 911 callers, emt, police, and dispatch. CTH was so desperate to slam Crump they forgot the person on the other end has phone records as well.

Here's a brief convo from T mobile customers NOT discussing this case:
question from one customer:

"When I log in and look at calls I notice the calls reflect calls made in EDT, while Data information seems to be based on PDT. At the bottom of both pages are statements that the dates/times reflected are in Pacific time. As a reference for the call I used a call from my wife and it reflected EDT (which is where I am), however when I purposely did a large data download it was reflected in Pacific time. Anyone else notice this behavior when they log into their My Tmobile site?"

Response from another customer:


"It's been like that for a while, Josh.

I was told by another T-Mobile person it's because calls are translated to local time zone of where they're made because of billing purposes, but data & texts don't have different prices for peak and off-peak."

That customer confirms by pulling info from T-Mobile:

"Usage screens on My T-Mobile display the customer's time zone for voice calls. For messaging and data, the date and time are displayed in Pacific Time (PST/PDT)."
Support: MyTmobile data/calls tracking

I have two photos. The first is the unfenced short cut at the Retreat... on Oregon Ave.




This image shows the direction of travel George recreates in the reenactment video as he spots Trayvon near the northwest corner of the community, and then up until he parked on Twin Trees Lane and got out of his truck. George stopped at the clubhouse, I believe for eight and a half minutes or there about, then tracked Trayvon as Trayvon fled on Twin Trees Lane. It is fairly certain that George place the non-emergency phone call while parked in the clubhouse parking lot.

Excon said:

There are alleged discrepancies with that document.

Four phones are on that account.
An overlap of time.
The .pdf supposedly displayed records that do not fit the known record format. Indicating that there was tampering by Crump.

And then there is this discrepancy.

Supposedly.
When records are viewed online, local call time appears, but when downloaded, the calls are recorded in Pacific Standard Time.

To get a better understanding, you have to read the following along with all the comments.

Update #11 – Trayvon Martin Shooting – Final Deconstruction of Benjamin Crumps Media Evidence | The Last Refuge

Click to expand...

But wouldn't that mean somebody was using Ms phone at 10 PM?

What if...? said:

But wouldn't that mean somebody was using Ms phone at 10 PM?

Click to expand...

TM was using his phone at 10pm. By that time he was at the morgue and Holder sent in Seal Team 6.7 to switch bodies and fly the real TM to Aruba. How did you expect TM to tell them which walls to cut to find him? They aren't psychic!!!!!

I seriously doubt Excon will come back and address the fact the CTH theory has been proven wrong.