• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

George Zimmerman: WKMG studies where he gains, loses credibility

Not given a chance for cooperation =/= failure to cooperate

He was certainly given a chance to cooperate. He could have called SPD at any time and said "my son was on the phone with phone number xxx-xxx-xxxx at about hte time of the shooting.". Instead, he indicated he would talk to his lawyers first, then decided not to give SPD any info. This is not cooperating to most people.
 
Last edited:
Don't need them. At least with Tmobile. You can access the necessary info right on their website. I would suspect you would realize that by now.

No... I didn't know that.
 
No... I didn't know that.

Well, thank you for acknowledging that. Now, you can go back and read through the thread. It was all there, including a copy/paste of relevant information.
 
Not knowing the PIN =/= failure to cooperate.

1. He never indicated he knew the PIN
2. SPD asked for the PIN
3. Not given a chance for cooperation =/= failure to cooperate
Prove he didn't know the pin. You can't.
Show that he actually needed the pin to access the information. You can't because he did access the information and and failed to cooperate with the police.


You are sitting there looking mighty funny trying to assert the above quote.
No one in their right mind would think it is about the pin, but what the information the pin allowed access to.
Even Tracy knew it was about the information the phone contained.
That is event by what Tracy himself said.

Pay close attention to the following quote, as it proved you wrong even before posting your above non-sense.


Here is another report.
Pay close attention to what they reported Tracy told them.
I emboldened it for you.


Sanford police Detective Doris Singleton contacted the carrier, T-Mobile, asking for the code. The company told her they could get to the information if they had the PIN to the account. On March 5, Sanford police Sgt. Joe Santiago asked Tracy Martin for the PIN, according to a police report. Tracy Martin said he'd check with his attorney.

Martin never got back with police. At a March 8 news conference in Orlando,
Tracy Martin told reporters he would not help police download information from the phone

Trayvon Martin cellphone: What's on Trayvon's cellphone? Authorities still don't know - Orlando Sentinel

Tracy didn't just fail to cooperate, he refused.

This was posted before your non-sense. Did youfail to read it?
Besides it showing he refused to cooperate, it also makes it clear that Tracy understood that the police wanted to obtain the information from the phone, not just a pin. Duh!
 
Last edited:
Prove it? You prove he did have the PIN. You are the one making accusations. The accuser must prove it, not the accused by your logic:lol:
I never made the claim that he did.
I said he could access the information with out it, or did you forget that?

And as the articles show, he refused to cooperate and knew exactly what was being requested.
 
I never made the claim that he did.
I said he could access the information with out it, or did you forget that?

And as the articles show, he refused to cooperate and knew exactly what was being requested.

Did you forget that is an accusation?

Prove it!
 
Did you forget that is an accusation?

Prove it!
:doh

Already been done, in several ways.
But what you seem not to be grasping is one that is most obvious. Tracy, the account holder, obtained the information and he didn't even have the phone.
Duh!
 
:doh

Already been done, in several ways.
But what you seem not to be grasping is one that is most obvious. Tracy, the account holder, obtained the information and he didn't even have the phone.
Duh!

Yes, from looking over the bill a few weeks later. Again, not having the information when asked =/= not cooperating.
 
Yes, from looking over the bill a few weeks later. Again, not having the information when asked =/= not cooperating.

Haven't we already been over this? On T-Mobile accounts Tracy would be able to view all that information in real time. He did not need the bill.

Regardless, even if you still want to believe he did not have it (which he did), he eventually did have it and still did not provide it to SPD. That would not be cooperating.
 
Yes, from looking over the bill a few weeks later. Again, not having the information when asked =/= not cooperating.

Wrong!
 
Haven't we already been over this? On T-Mobile accounts Tracy would be able to view all that information in real time. He did not need the bill.

Regardless, even if you still want to believe he did not have it (which he did), he eventually did have it and still did not provide it to SPD. That would not be cooperating.

Hindsight is always 20/20.
 
Hindsight is always 20/20.
And as Tracy announced to the world, he would not help police download information from the phone.
 
Tracy MArtin himself said that?

After discussing with his attorney, he said he didn't trust SPD and would not provide them with the info they requested. Instead, he got together with Crump. This is obviously cooperative in your world.
 
After discussing with his attorney, he said he didn't trust SPD and would not provide them with the info they requested. Instead, he got together with Crump. This is obviously cooperative in your world.

Sounds like he did the right thing.
 
Sounds like he did the right thing.


In your opinion. However, it clearly is not cooperation. So, to What If's original point - he was wrong - and Excon's response -he was correct - we now know the proper order.
 
In your opinion. However, it clearly is not cooperation. So, to What If's original point - he was wrong - and Excon's response -he was correct - we now know the proper order.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Tracy MArtin himself said that?

Sure buddy:lol:
You obviously don't pay attention.



Here is another report.
Pay close attention to what they reported Tracy told them.
I emboldened it for you.


Sanford police Detective Doris Singleton contacted the carrier, T-Mobile, asking for the code. The company told her they could get to the information if they had the PIN to the account. On March 5, Sanford police Sgt. Joe Santiago asked Tracy Martin for the PIN, according to a police report. Tracy Martin said he'd check with his attorney.

Martin never got back with police. At a March 8 news conference in Orlando,
Tracy Martin told reporters he would not help police download information from the phone

Trayvon Martin cellphone: What's on Trayvon's cellphone? Authorities still don't know - Orlando Sentinel
 
Back
Top Bottom