Trayvon Martin: Special prosecutor appointed in Trayvon Martin shooting case

Lord Tammerlain · Mar 25, 2012

joko104 said:
There is no evidence that Zimmerman followed Martin. "Should have" means nothing and your view that a person should never put themselves into a situation where an altercation was possible are the words of a reclusive coward because the world is a dangerous place.

This occured because the Martin engaged in the criminal act of felony aggravated assault. Is came down to being that simple.

Lesson learned? If you engage in felony aggravated assault you may get killed and it probably a long term benefit to the "innocent" general public is that is how it ends for a violent criminal.

What no evidence that zimmerman followed Martin

The phone calls by zimmerman to the police indicate that he was following Martin

Just why did Zimmerman get out of his car, to take a piss

This has to be one of the most idiotic posts in this thread

ric27 · Mar 25, 2012

Crosscheck said:
Ironic isn't it that the lynch mob mentality is exactly what got Zimmerman into this mess.

Memorize this ....Politics plays a huge role in what a DA does and how a jury reacts than law

Our system is not about justice.

Excon · Mar 25, 2012

j-mac said:
I get that from reading your own postings where you seem to dismiss anything that points to Zimmerman being in the wrong here what so ever...

There is no reason to engage in any speculation. None.
And yes I will dismiss it when it's not supported by the known evidence and mere speculation. Everybody should.

j-mac said:
Provided Quotes are not speculation.

Click to expand...

No, but they are heresay.

Not really, or technically yes.

All I am seeing is excuses for dismissing legitimate known evidence
Yes, when the Police Chief tells us what Zimmerman has said, that is hearsay. That is just a technicality.
But dismissing it as useless hearsay evidence is inappropriate for us to do in this setting, because this is the information that was used in the investigation and being relayed to us through the authorities.

j-mac said:
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.

Actually we don't need to. We can see - without speculating - that the evidence, as it is, is in line with their choice not to charge Zimmerman.
I seriously doubt this current investigation will find any new evidence to change that.
What I believe will happen, absent any new evidence, is procedural discrepancies will be found. But these discrepancies would not have changed the determination that Zimmerman was not in the wrong.

j-mac said:
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.

Yes. Eye witness are horrible evidence, usually for the defendant.

In this case we have a person saying one of the two had a white shirt on. Obviously she was mistaken.
In this case we have two(?) ladies saying they heard the screaming for help through their open window and heard a shot and then saw Zimmerman straddling Trayvon. These are the ladie(s?) claiming it was Trayvon calling for help. When they do not know if it was him or not.
Then we have the guy who was outside at the scene and actually saw who was calling for help. His statement was corroborated by Zimmerman's.
You usually do not get corroboration with mistaken witnesses - like the ladie(s?)

j-mac said:
911 calls can sink him as well as provide information of mitigation. We don't know fully yet.

Those calls did not sink him and wont this time around either. Unless it was determined he did use a slur, for a civil rights violation, and then maybe even not.

j-mac said:
Still heresay.....All she can provide is what Treyvon said to her over the phone, she wasn't there.

Hearsay, yes and no. We should dismiss the portions of her statement that would be determined by a court as hearsay.
The rest we should be able to use.

j-mac said:
No, something substantial, and concrete will do.

The evidence that is known to us is concrete and substantial.
It has held up to scrutiny.
Consistent with the events and even punctuated with corroboration at times.
I am beginning to think you just don't like what it has to say.

j-mac said:
but I certainly hope that goes for me as well....

If it isn't evidence, or even supported by the evidence, you are on your own.

j-mac said:
How so? is there a document, or anything stating that he was a member of the Neighborhood Watch?

I know you have actively participated in the topic when this has been sourced.
Still need it?

j-mac said:
Who knows if Zimmerman is telling the truth? I don't?

lol
His statement has not been disputed by any other evidence.
That is the point.
You just can't say, or the government shouldn't be able to say, 'damn the evidence I am going to charge you anyways'.

j-mac said:
Getting out of his vehicle to pursue on foot is beyond what I would think is reasonable under the circumstances.

Keeping someone under observation is not unreasonable.
You realize where the confrontation occurred right? And that it was between residences and not a road, right?
No. It was not unreasonable.

j-mac said:
That is your opinion.

Sure it is, supported by fact.

j-mac said:
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.

Click to expand...

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.

They do not need to be in sync.
But they are consistent with the evidence.
I do see I left out the word physical in Zimmerman's.
But I am sure that is not your complaint.

j-mac said:
That doesn't match the impression that you are giving of this case.

Really?
All I can say is, argue the evidence that we know of and stop engaging in pure supposition and you can't go wrong.
Your position may eventual be shown to be incorrect but you wouldn't be wrong for taking it because it wasn't unfounded.

j-mac said:
Much of what we have is heresay from the shooter himself...I want more.

Honestly, I see another excuse for not using the evidence we have. That isn't good enough.
Yes I would like more also but we are not going to get that at this point so we must use what we have.
I would love to have a timeline of events.
The call of suspicion was responded to when an Officer was dispatched at 17 minutes after the hour, the Officer arrived on scene when the shot rang out, and after attempts to revive Trayvon by responders, he was pronounced dead at 30 minute after the hour.
You got thirteen minutes to work with, it shouldn't be hard.
Why don't you waste a day or two trying to come up with one? lol

j-mac said:
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.

Click to expand...

Another clue is that the State and Federal investigations have been launched to question that conclusion.

No that isn't a clue at all. That is the State and Fed responding to a misinformed public outcry.

j-mac said:
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?

You are looking at it from Trayvon's point of view instead of Zimmerman's.

Whether or not Zimmerman's action were right or wrong is not dependent on how Trayvon viewed the situation, or how Trayvon felt or his thoughts.

Objective Voice · Mar 25, 2012

I've stood back and listened to as much media coverage on this storyline as I could before deciding to add my 2-cents worth.

The following post does a decent job of providing an overview of events despite getting a few facts incorrect (i.e., Zimmerman left his house to follow Trayvon):

Pilots For 911 Truth said:
Zimmerman, places the call to 911
Zimmerman, is the one staring down Trayvon, because Zimmerman is the one giving a description to the police
Zimmerman, is the one who indicts himself with the statement, "They always get away with stuff like this..." (stuff like what? and who is "they" by the way)
Zimmerman, is one who leave his house and pursues after 911 effectively tells him not to
Zimmerman, is the one who confronts Trayvon
Zimmerman, is the one who approaches Trayvon
Zimmerman, is the one carrying a concealed weapon
Zimmerman, had a past that was known for making bogus calls to 911
Zimmerman, self appoints as the neighborhood "watchmen"

At every turn, Zimmerman, is controlling AND escalating the situation. Zimmerman, could have stayed his butt in the house until the police arrived on the scene. The boy was heading home from the damn store. At what point is heading home from the store a criminal act, a possible criminal act, a suspicious act, or an act the is in anyway hostile, aggressive and/or somehow threatening to anyone?

Clearly, people have formed their own opinions as to what transpired prior to the shooting, but IMO except for clearly defining who attacked whom first, I'd say there are three pieces of witness testimony where the facts are not in dispute:

FACT: The neighborhood Mr. Zimmerman was patrolling had exeprience a rash of home break-ins in recent days. You get that in the opening entry from the 911 transcript where Mr. Zimmerman makes this point very clear.

Zimmerman: Hey, we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood...

911 Dispatcher: Ok, he's just walking around the area...

Zimmerman: ...looking at all the houses.

So, clearly Zimmerman assumed Trayvon was a potential vandale on the prowl looking for his next home to break into. But here's what we do know concerning Trayvon's mindset at the time he was being followed by Mr. Zimmerman as relayed from the cell phone transcripts from the conversation Trayvon had with his girlfriend prior to the shooting:

Recounting her conversation with Martin, the teen girl said, "He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man."

"I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run but he said he was not going to run," she said.

After a few minutes, the girl said, Martin thought he was safe. But eventually the man appeared again.

FACT: From the 911 transcript, we know this cat and mouse chase did take place and that Mr. Zimmerman did lose track of Trayvon at one point as they neared the clubhouse of the housing complex.

FACT: We also know from the cell phone transcript between Trayvon and his girlfriend that Trayvon did notice Mr. Zimmerman following him and as such, he turned around and approached Mr. Zimmerman and asked him directly why was Mr. Zimmerman following him.

It's at this point where the facts are not clear. We don't know if Trayvon attacked Mr. Zimmerman or if Trayvon was the one who was caught off guard. However, from the cell phone transcript, we do know a scuffle did ensue as Trayvon approached and confronted Mr. Zimmerman:

After a few minutes, the girl said, Martin thought he was safe. But eventually the man appeared again.

"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for?'" the girl said. "And the man said, 'What are you doing here?' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the [phone’s\] headset just fell."

The line went dead, the girl said.

From there, events are a bit sketchy. However, one fact that isn't in dispute is that at some point "the man in the red sweater" gained the upperhand as the testimony of "John" makes clear.

"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.

John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.

"And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."

We can rightly assume that the man in the red sweater was Mr. Zimmerman because according to the 911 transcript, Mr. Zimmerman stated that Trayvon was wearing a dark hoodie.

911 Dispatcher: Did you see what he's wearing?

Zimmerman: Yeah. A dark hoodie...

For my 2-cents worth, I believe Mr. Zimmerman did go too far in attempting to carry out his civic duties as a member of his neighborhood watch group. His neighborhood may have fell victim to burglaries by men who happen to fit the profile of Black males in their late teens/early 20s, but Mr. Zimmerman didn't have to take matters into his own hands at any point in his "steakout" of his potential burglary suspect. Not only did the 911 dispatcher recommend to Mr. Zimmerman not to follow Trayvon, he also informed him that the police were on their way. Moreover, both the dispatcher and Mr. Zimmerman spoke at length as to where he could meet the police to discuss the situation further.

In my opinion, Mr. Zimmerman was clearly in the wrong here. He should have taken the 911 Dispatcher's advice and stopped following Trayvon. Of course, Trayvon's mistake was turning around and ultimately confronting Mr. Zimmerman. But regardless of what Trayvon did short of attacking Mr. Zimmerman (again per Trayvon's girlfriend's cell phone account, all that happened initially was some pushing and shoving ensued prior to the apparent fight "John" witnessed), Mr. Zimmerman used excessive force in dispelling with his alleged attacker and potential house burgler. No matter what Trayvon did, he didn't deserve the fate that befell him.

Sheik Yerbuti · Mar 25, 2012

Excon said:
False.
There is no other sources other than Zimmerman that say he was attacked from behind, but his statement is evidence.

But of course - there is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's statement either, which means you are engaged in unfounded supposition.

You assume Zimmerman may be lying when he didn't have enough time or could have been of the mind to concoct a lie that could hold up to scrutiny, so why do you not do the same for the girl who had time and was of the mind and definitely had a reason?

If Zimmerman did not inform police that Trayvon asked him why he was following him and if he did not inform them he asked Trayvon what he was doing there, then he lied by omission. Part of the police report is online and it does not say Zimmerman mentioned any of that.

Excon · Mar 25, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
It's amusing how you cite another neighborhood watch captain as though it were relevant while you dismiss the opinion of others as irrelevant who disagree with you, like the authors of the stand your ground law.

Please allow me to throw your advice right back at you.

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Please pay better attention so I don't have to explain these things to you.

I was responding to another who had said the following:
"there was NO official neighborhood watch group. HE invented it. HE made himself the "captain". HE was the only member."

That exchange ended with the following:
"meanwhile, back up your claim that he was not the only member of his neighborhood watch team."
As you can see, that is what I provided.

Not to rely on anything he said, but to show Zimmerman wasn't the only one.
Capisce?

But you have brought up the author's of SYG.
Their opinions matter not as to it's application.
The letter of the law and how it is interpreted within the judicial system does.
And it was clear from a statement made that one of them clearly wasn't informed of all the facts regarding this case.
That person was political grandstanding.
Capisce?

Excon · Mar 25, 2012

Objective Voice said:
FACT: We also know from the cell phone transcript between Trayvon and his girlfriend that Trayvon did notice Mr. Zimmerman following him and as such, he turned around and approached Mr. Zimmerman and asked him directly why was Mr. Zimmerman following him.

Mischaracterization.
To the rest of what you say.
The Chief has already stated that the evidence does not contradict Zimmerman's statement.
So we can only assume, based on the evidence, because no other evidence exists to say otherwise, that Zimmerman wasn't in the wrong.

Sheik Yerbuti said:
If Zimmerman did not inform police that Trayvon asked him why he was following him and if he did not inform them he asked Trayvon what he was doing there, then he lied by omission. Part of the police report is online and it does not say Zimmerman mentioned any of that.

You are assuming that what she says wasn't a lie.
You are also assuming he didn't say any about it if it happened which would have included how it happened.

Please provide a link to the police report you found online with just part of his statement.

Sheik Yerbuti · Mar 25, 2012

joko104 said:
There is no evidence that Zimmerman followed Martin.

Earth to joko:

911 Dispatcher: "Are you following him?"

Zimmerman: "Yeah."

Crosscheck · Mar 25, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Earth to joko:

911 Dispatcher: "Are you following him?"

Zimmerman: "Yeah."

Damn facts get in the way all the time.

Objective Voice · Mar 25, 2012

Excon said:
Mischaracterization.
To the rest of what you say.
The Chief has already stated that the evidence does not contradict Zimmerman's statement.
So we can only assume, based on the evidence, because no other evidence exists to say otherwise, that Zimmerman wasn't in the wrong.

How is the above a mischaracterization of the events? It's taken directly from the transcript (or translation) of the cell phone conversation between Trayvon and his girlfriend. Moreover, said conversation supports events at that point from the 911 transcript.

At the very least we have two different versions of the same event. However, you are correct. Until a full investigation is completed all we have is varying stories of what truly transpired. And unless other eyewitnesses come forward, it's a matter of Mr. Zimmerman's recounting of events, the 911 transcript, "John's" testimony as well as that of Trayvon's girlfriend to put the pieces together as accurately as possible. For my take, Mr. Zimmerman went a step too far, but I'm more than willing to let the evidence come out before saying the justicial system should throw the book at the man and throw away the key when done.

joko104 · Mar 25, 2012

haymarket said:
Yeah blame the victim .... I am sure the kid walked those streets for hours night after night until the watch eager beaver took the bait. :roll::shock:

Zimmerman the victim and now is being victimized more. Martin was a criminal engaged in felony aggravated assault at the time he was shot.

joko104 · Mar 25, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Earth to joko:

911 Dispatcher: "Are you following him?"

Zimmerman: "Yeah."

Yes, but nothing showing he had not returned to his truck as he said he had.

Excon · Mar 25, 2012

Objective Voice said:
Excon said:

Objective Voice said:

FACT: We also know from the cell phone transcript between Trayvon and his girlfriend that Trayvon did notice Mr. Zimmerman following him and as such, * he turned around and approached Mr. Zimmerman and asked him directly why was Mr. Zimmerman following him.

Click to expand...

Mischaracterization.

Click to expand...

How is the above a mischaracterization of the events? It's taken directly from the transcript (or translation) of the cell phone conversation between Trayvon and his girlfriend. Moreover, said conversation supports events at that point from the 911 transcript.

At the very least we have two different versions of the same event. However, you are correct. Until a full investigation is completed all we have is varying stories of what truly transpired. And unless other eyewitnesses come forward, it's a matter of Mr. Zimmerman's recounting of events, the 911 transcript, "John's" testimony as well as that of Trayvon's girlfriend to put the pieces together as accurately as possible. For my take, Mr. Zimmerman went a step too far, but I'm more than willing to let the evidence come out before saying the justicial system should throw the book at the man and throw away the key when done.

* Because contact was lost in between.
Verified from both statements.
Then contact was made.
According to Zimmerman it came from behind.

Speculation: It is more then possible for the question to have come from behind.

The statements are consistent.
Not corroborative.

We know that there is no evidence that contradicts Zimmerman's statement.
So the girlfriend's statement doesn't contradict Zimmerman's.

Sheik Yerbuti · Mar 25, 2012

Excon said:
Please allow me to throw your advice right back at you.
I was responding to another who had said the following:
"there was NO official neighborhood watch group. HE invented it. HE made himself the "captain". HE was the only member."

That exchange ended with the following:
"meanwhile, back up your claim that he was not the only member of his neighborhood watch team."
As you can see, that is what I provided.

Not to rely on anything he said, but to show Zimmerman wasn't the only one.
Capisce?

But you have brought up the author's of SYG.
Their opinions matter not as to it's application.
The letter of the law and how it is interpreted within the judicial system does.
And it was clear from a statement made that one of them clearly wasn't informed of all the facts regarding this case.
That person was political grandstanding.
Capisce?

Umm, the other neighborhood watch captain does not judicial system and also doeen't interpret the law -- yet his opinion you call relevant; whereas the author of the law you call irrelevant.

Seems your opinion of relevance is limited to whom you agree with. :roll:

joko104 · Mar 25, 2012

MaggieD said:
I think that's probably the right thing to do. There is nothing like a public trial to quell dissent and gets the real facts out there. Zimmerman might want that as well. I would if I were innocent and were put in his position.

After Obama's statement, it will be very difficult of a largely African-American grand jury under a Democrat elected judge in a Democrat city of a HIGH African-American population to not indict as those are not appealable and no transcript every available.

I suspect the federals might try to use a catch-all "violation of civil rights" criminal federal charge - an abstract law that basically allows finding someone guilty of being a racist - during which Zimmerman is held in a very dangerous situation.

There seems only 3 choices to Zimmerman IF indicted:

Endure an extended time in jail - either is isolation (which is torture) or in constant danger in general population awaiting trial - in which he has a crappy attorney appointed by and paid for by the state (meaning causes not trouble) against the full force of the federal government.
Ideally, they'll want him to plea to manslaughter offering a pretty good deal - and to save his life he probably has to accept it.

If he fights it and gets a prison term, there are only two outcomes given the massive attention to him including the President himself:
1. He is put in isolation. In the book about Devil's Island, being put in solitaire was more feared that beatings, torture and rape. Anyone who doesn't think solitary confinement is unbearable, go see how long you can stand staying alone in an empty closet.
2. Or being put in general population where I don't think he'd live very long and quite upleasantly. Of course, by then he will be forgotten and his death just a footnote.

It is my opinion that Zimmerman should go to Peru or into hiding as doing so not is not illegal. He could come back after a year, thus eliminating the prosecution holding him in jail a year or two claiming they need time to prepare for trial. Since there are no warrants for him now and given he has already had to go into hiding for death threats, his doing so would not be illegal. This also would push it past the election.

joko104 · Mar 25, 2012

Objective Voice said:
How is the above a mischaracterization of the events? It's taken directly from the transcript (or translation) of the cell phone conversation between Trayvon and his girlfriend. Moreover, said conversation supports events at that point from the 911 transcript.

At the very least we have two different versions of the same event. However, you are correct. Until a full investigation is completed all we have is varying stories of what truly transpired. And unless other eyewitnesses come forward, it's a matter of Mr. Zimmerman's recounting of events, the 911 transcript, "John's" testimony as well as that of Trayvon's girlfriend to put the pieces together as accurately as possible. For my take, Mr. Zimmerman went a step too far, but I'm more than willing to let the evidence come out before saying the justicial system should throw the book at the man and throw away the key when done.

There are 2 eye witnesses, not just "John." There also is the 13 year old African-American teen.

Crosscheck · Mar 25, 2012

This trial will be like OJ Simpson's with the results be either strongly liked or strongly not liked. There appears to be no grey area of anybody here sitting on the wall on this.

Unless somebody has taken a video , and wouldn't that be something , I really doubt anyone's view is going to change.

Bring on the frustration.

Excon · Mar 25, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
Umm, the other neighborhood watch captain does not judicial system and also doeen't interpret the law -- yet his opinion you call relevant; whereas the author of the law you call irrelevant.

Seems your opinion of relevance is limited to whom you agree with. :roll:

WTF?
Are you drinking?
The "other neighborhood watch captain does not judicial system and also doeen't interpret the law.." ? What?
Do you not understand why the other watch captain was provided?
I clearly explained it to you.
And I never relied on his opinion for anything.

Do you need someone else to explain it?

Sheik Yerbuti · Mar 25, 2012

Excon said:
WTF?
Are you drinking?
The "other neighborhood watch captain does not judicial system and also doeen't interpret the law.." ? What?
Do you not understand why the other watch captain was provided?
I clearly explained it to you.
And I never relied on his opinion for anything.

Do you need someone else to explain it?

No, you're clear enough -- if someone holds an opinion you agree with, then their opinion is relevant, otherwise it's not.

Excon · Mar 25, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
No, you're clear enough -- if someone holds an opinion you agree with, then their opinion is relevant, otherwise it's not.

You couldn't be more wrong.
If the evidence said that Zimmerman was in the wrong, that is the position I would take.

That is what you have a hard time understanding isn't it?

Sheik Yerbuti · Mar 25, 2012

Excon said:
You couldn't be more wrong.
If the evidence said that Zimmerman was in the wrong, that is the position I would take.

That is what you have a hard time understanding isn't it?

No, I understand just fine. Those with whom you agree you call, "relevant." Those with whom you disagree you call, "irrelevant."

You've demonstrated this.

ric27 · Mar 26, 2012

joko104 said:
After Obama's statement, it will be very difficult of a largely African-American grand jury under a Democrat elected judge in a Democrat city of a HIGH African-American population to not indict as those are not appealable and no transcript every available.

I suspect the federals might try to use a catch-all "violation of civil rights" criminal federal charge - an abstract law that basically allows finding someone guilty of being a racist - during which Zimmerman is held in a very dangerous situation.

They will probably recommend, a manslaughter charge...

Zim had no intention of killing the guy, but check this out... HE SHOULD have been aware of the actions (in other words he was reckless), this would fit the definition of manslaughter. No intent to kill Martin but he should have been aware of the danger of his actions and push, Zim for some prison time just to appease the local rabble rousers and race baiters.

Excon · Mar 26, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
No, I understand just fine. Those with whom you agree you call, "relevant." Those with whom you disagree you call, "irrelevant."

You've demonstrated this.

Beside it describing your actions, you are just wrong about me.
You have said it about this watch captain issue and you were wrong then. And you are wrong now.

Your wrong.
Just go to bed and sleep it off.

Sheik Yerbuti · Mar 26, 2012

Excon said:
Beside it describing your actions, you are just wrong about me.
You have said it about this watch captain issue and you were wrong then. And you are wrong now.

Your wrong.
Just go to bed and sleep it off.

It's what you did. Live with it.

What if...? · Mar 26, 2012

Excon said:
I know, at this point, I am right. That may change and it may not.
But what I see is you are ignoring that he didn't have enough time or even could have been of the mind to concoct a lie that could hold up to scrutiny.
And the only reason I can see for you doing so is that you are doing so in favor of a preconceived and biased position.

Come now, evetybody knows that "he attacked me for no reason and I had no choice" is the ONLY story that lets you walk away from shooting someone dead.

WHEN the two stories came out is pertinent, as the GF mentions the raising of the hood that Zim mentions, but Zim doesn't mention the verbal exchange (at least in what's been released).

But then no one was immediately aware of the call-in-progress to the girlfriend, afaik.