Several George Zimmerman witnesses change their accounts

[clambake]

so, he would have had to been stealthy at least twice?

[elbamba]

not you or a single one of the lawyers you talked to knew about the money?

hmmmm

No because this was a couple of weeks ago when the story was hot. I had no clue about the 150,000 or 204,000 as you alleged until I read your post today. News to me. That is why I decided to pull my arguments on it, I don't know much about it. That is also why I asked you about 5 times to tell me what you were talking about at the beginning and middle of this thread.

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao Seriously?

Zimmerman has been vilified as everything but a child of God going on 2 months now.So has Martin, you did it.

[elbamba]

so, he would have had to been stealthy at least twice?

Stealthy was used in Chumps definition. The legal definition, which is all I really care about, does not call for stealth.

[elbamba]

Correction, Florida's legal definition.

[Heath Ledger]

you didn't have a big sword purchase?


aCTUALLY I DID BUT IT WAS FROM DUBAI AND HIS NAME WAS MUHAMMAD

[clambake]

No because this was a couple of weeks ago when the story was hot. I had no clue about the 150,000 or 204,000 as you alleged until I read your post today. News to me. That is why I decided to pull my arguments on it, I don't know much about it. That is also why I asked you about 5 times to tell me what you were talking about at the beginning and middle of this thread.

i apologize. i just don't think you're very interested in knowing the real george zimmerman.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

My opinion is based entirely on what I have been able to find in the news. I paid a lot of attention when this story first broke because I was annoyed that the media made this into a white vs. black case. I have read probably 50 articles on this and have talked to a few lawyers I know who are in the community but who ultimately did not have much to add outside of what I could find online.

Based on the pictures and the witness statement of I believe a 16 year kid who said he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, I reached my conclusion. There is certainly loads of evidence that I have not seen, however, if we are trying the case online, I think I win.

The witnesses sworn testimony that you refer to are all witnesses changing their testimony and admitting they did so for various reasons that I believe will ultimately exclude them from being admissible (i.e. witness changing his testimony after watching tv).

You can roll your eyes all you want and tell me why I am wrong. I have thick skin. But this is a message board so I will post the message that I think some people might find interesting.

The OP is about how witnesses are changing their testimonies. There have been all manner of obfuscations, misquotes, conflicting information and just straight up bullshit from the very beginning. But you want to try the case on a message board on the basis of the witness account you like and newscasts.

Our legal system is certainly flawed but its probably the best in the world when it comes to sorting all of that out. I find it irresponsible to take that action yourself without any of the evidence without having interviewed any of the witnesses, without reading reports from the various police officers, medical examiners, and forensics experts or speaking with them; all to confirm your bias. Make no mistake what you are doing here is confirming your bias.

So yes I will roll my eyes everytime while I wait to hear what the state of Florida and Zimmerman's cases actually are.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No because this was a couple of weeks ago when the story was hot. I had no clue about the 150,000 or 204,000 as you alleged until I read your post today. News to me. That is why I decided to pull my arguments on it, I don't know much about it. That is also why I asked you about 5 times to tell me what you were talking about at the beginning and middle of this thread.

You didn't pay attention to the magistrates hearing and you think oyu are in a position to make a case on behalf of Zimmerman? You know how you would argue it? gmfb

Reasonable doubt is what it is but I am not going to fill in the gaps to try and ensure it.

[elbamba]

i apologize. i just don't think you're very interested in knowing the real george zimmerman.

You are partially right. I care about his past about as much as I care that Martin had weed in his system. That is not at all. I feel bad that he was killed, don't get me wrong on that, I think that Zimmerman's actions that night were out of line and wrong. He should have stayed in the car.

Change the rolls and have Martin be the shooter of Zimmerman with identical facts and I would be supporting Martin under Florida Law. I think that Zimmerman walks because of Florida law. I could be wrong in the end, but I would not bet against it.

[Yonivore]

So has Martin, you did it.
I was respondiing to this:


Yes, we all know that negative characterizations are reserved solely for Martin in this case.
And, other than stating that I believe Zimmerman's version of events is supported by the known evidence, how have I vilified Martin?

[elbamba]

The OP is about how witnesses are changing their testimonies. There have been all manner of obfuscations, misquotes, conflicting information and just straight up bullshit from the very beginning. But you want to try the case on a message board on the basis of the witness account you like and newscasts.

Our legal system is certainly flawed but its probably the best in the world when it comes to sorting all of that out. I find it irresponsible to take that action yourself without any of the evidence without having interviewed any of the witnesses, without reading reports from the various police officers, medical examiners, and forensics experts or speaking with them all to confirm your bias. Make no mistake what you are doing here is confirming your bias.

So yes I will roll my eyes everytime while I wait to hear what the state of Florida and Zimmerman's cases actually are.

Good. I am sure that I could go to the original Skittles thread and find you jumping to conclusions without evidence. The difference is that when I jump to conclusions, supported by evidence or not, I have a degree of expertise in the subject. I might not be Jackie Chiles (sp), but I know something about criminal defense.

I think your bigger problem is that I am drawing a conclusion that you disagree with and you hate thinking that I might be right and these witnesses might just get torn apart by a quality defense attorney.

[Yonivore]

You are partially right. I care about his past about as much as I care that Martin had weed in his system. That is not at all. I feel bad that he was killed, don't get me wrong on that, I think that Zimmerman's actions that night were out of line and wrong. He should have stayed in the car.

Change the rolls and have Martin be the shooter of Zimmerman with identical facts and I would be supporting Martin under Florida Law. I think that Zimmerman walks because of Florida law. I could be wrong in the end, but I would not bet against it.
Why do you stay in your car?

That small gated community has been suffering a rash of property crimes and burglaries.

The Neighborhood Association had identified George Zimmerman as the person to whom suspicious activity should be reported.

Zimmerman observed a suspicious person walking through the neighborhood, in the rain, appearing (to him) to be under the influence of something, and looking at houses -- in a neighborhood that had been experiencing a spate of property crimes and burglaries.

Zimmerman called 911 and nothing in the call indicates Zimmerman's intent was to do any more than keep the suspicious person in sight until police arrived.

[clambake]

Change the rolls and have Martin be the shooter of Zimmerman with identical facts and I would be supporting Martin under Florida Law.

i wouldn't.

[elbamba]

You didn't pay attention to the magistrates hearing and you think oyu are in a position to make a case on behalf of Zimmerman? You know how you would argue it? gmfb

Reasonable doubt is what it is but I am not going to fill in the gaps to try and ensure it.

I did pay attention to the bail hearing that was a few weeks ago. I was unfamiliar with the 200,000 account. I thought I was fairly clear about this.

[ChumpDumper]

I was respondiing to this:
It's called sarcasm.

I know, you're fine about Martin's being trashed.

[ChumpDumper]

Why do you stay in your car?Why get out of your car?

[elbamba]

Why do you stay in your car?

That small gated community has been suffering a rash of property crimes and burglaries.

The Neighborhood Association had identified George Zimmerman as the person to whom suspicious activity should be reported.

Zimmerman observed a suspicious person walking through the neighborhood, in the rain, appearing (to him) to be under the influence of something, and looking at houses -- in a neighborhood that had been experiencing a spate of property crimes and burglaries.

Zimmerman called 911 and nothing in the call indicates Zimmerman's intent was to do any more than keep the suspicious person in sight until police arrived.

Because I have a wife and kids and a lot to lose by getting out of my car. I call the police and let them handle it. I might follow in my car, but I sure as hell am not getting out unless it is to protect someone.

[elbamba]

Do you think Zimmerman wishes right now he had stayed in his car Yoni?

I would put a million dollars on it that he does.

[ChumpDumper]

Because I have a wife and kids and a lot to lose by getting out of my car. I call the police and let them handle it. I might follow in my car, but I sure as hell am not getting out unless it is to protect someone.Those Skittles were going to be eaten by that madman!

[elbamba]

i wouldn't.

Nothing wrong with that.

[TheSkeptic]

The OP is about how witnesses are changing their testimonies. There have been all manner of obfuscations, misquotes, conflicting information and just straight up bullshit from the very beginning. But you want to try the case on a message board on the basis of the witness account you like and newscasts.

Our legal system is certainly flawed but its probably the best in the world when it comes to sorting all of that out. I find it irresponsible to take that action yourself without any of the evidence without having interviewed any of the witnesses, without reading reports from the various police officers, medical examiners, and forensics experts or speaking with them; all to confirm your bias. Make no mistake what you are doing here is confirming your bias.

So yes I will roll my eyes everytime while I wait to hear what the state of Florida and Zimmerman's cases actually are.

As fun as the speculation has been and even though I'm on the side of the victim, I agree with this. I really am interested in hearing what the cases are because so far I'm not 100% on board with Murder 2.

Though after seeing Corey's work in that other case with the woman and the warning shot, I'm thinking there's something there that has led her to the conclusion that this was the appropriate charge. I'd like to see what that is. And while we know that Zimmerman's going to claim self-defense I'll be interested to see if O'Mara argues the law or the evidence because that'll also tell us something about the facts of this case as well.

[clambake]

Nothing wrong with that.

yoni would be all over martin if the roles were reversed.

[MannyIsGod]

Why do you stay in your car?

That small gated community has been suffering a rash of property crimes and burglaries.

The Neighborhood Association had identified George Zimmerman as the person to whom suspicious activity should be reported.

Zimmerman observed a suspicious person walking through the neighborhood, in the rain, appearing (to him) to be under the influence of something, and looking at houses -- in a neighborhood that had been experiencing a spate of property crimes and burglaries.

Zimmerman called 911 and nothing in the call indicates Zimmerman's intent was to do any more than keep the suspicious person in sight until police arrived.

Because when you don't stay in your car bad things happen and you have no real authority.

I can't believe you would ask why would you stay in the car at this point. You've obviously learned nothing from this case.

[Yonivore]

Do you think Zimmerman wishes right now he had stayed in his car Yoni?
Absolutely. Knowing what he does now, I would agree, he would have never left the car. That doesn't mean he didn't have cause to follow Martin. It just means he didn't know what was going to happen if he did.

Not many people who have had to use deadly force wouldn't wish the circumstances that arose to require it hadn't happened.


I would put a million dollars on it that he does.
Me too.

[ChumpDumper]

That doesn't mean he didn't have cause to follow Martin. What was his cause?

[clambake]

you think he's stupid now, huh?

[Yonivore]

Because when you don't stay in your car bad things happen and you have no real authority.
Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights to be where he was doing what he was doing.

Sometimes, when you do stay in your car, bad things happen and you're not there to stop them.


I can't believe you would ask why would you stay in the car at this point. You've obviously learned nothing from this case.
Hindsight is 20/20. If I knew that by leaving my car an unarmed youth was going to get shot and killed, I'd stay in my car. To bad we can't know those bad things are going to happen in advance. There are infinite permutations of circumstances that might lead someone to make the same decision now, regardless of what happened in Florida.

[clambake]

yep, he did a stupid thing. stupid, armed and looking for trouble.

killer combination.

[MannyIsGod]

Why are you talking about rights? I never said it was not against his rights. Its within my rights to go to the worst neighborhood in town with a t shirt that is full of racist crap. But guess what, its STUPID.

What Zimmerman did was stupid. THATS why you stay in the car.

[TheSkeptic]

Since when is "stupidity" considered a viable defense? What?

[TheSkeptic]

And while I'm sure he's sorry, his "regret" shouldn't count for anything either.

[Yonivore]

Why are you talking about rights? I never said it was not against his rights. Its within my rights to go to the worst neighborhood in town with a t shirt that is full of racist crap. But guess what, its STUPID.
You're suggesting Martin was dangerous and Zimmerman should have cowered until police arrived? Is that it?

How do you equate Zimmerman leaving his vehicle to follow a suspicious person -- in his own gated community -- with, well, I'm not real sure with what you were trying to equate it.

Seems a little racist, to me, to suggest the worst neighborhoods would be the place to encounter trouble over displaying "racist crap."


What Zimmerman did was stupid.
What Zimmerman did is done every day, in communities across the country, without similar outcomes.

What happened was unfortunate. It was also rare and not because people stayed in their cars.


THATS why you stay in the car.
Because, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

There is no reason to believe Zimmerman could know his attempt to keep a suspicious person in sight until police arrived would end the way this did. The vast majority of the time, it doesn't. The vast majority of the time, the suspicious person gets away -- just as Zimmerman had feared happened in this case.

The next most frequent outcome is the suspicious person and the person following them meet and discover there is no reason for alarm. They either leave with a hand shake and a new understanding over the misunderstanding or the person that was viewed as suspicious gets pissed and hurls a few insults as they part ways.

Another outcome is, the police arrive and are able to talk to the suspicious person and either satisfy themselves there is no cause for alarm or otherwise conclude the incident (arrest or advise the person to leave the property under threat of arrest for trespassing, etc...)

In rare incidents is anyone killed...or even assaulted.

[Yonivore]

And while I'm sure he's sorry, his "regret" shouldn't count for anything either.
Who says it does?

[clambake]

hey yoni, why didn't penniless george stay at home with his wife in his daddy's house?

did he need to protect the community from someone that lives in the community?

[CuckingFunt]

Don't bring skittles to a gun fight.

It's funny 'cause a teenager died.

[MannyIsGod]

You're suggesting Martin was dangerous and Zimmerman should have cowered until police arrived? Is that it?

How do you equate Zimmerman leaving his vehicle to follow a suspicious person -- in his own gated community -- with, well, I'm not real sure with what you were trying to equate it.

Seems a little racist, to me, to suggest the worst neighborhoods would be the place to encounter trouble over displaying "racist crap."


What Zimmerman did is done every day, in communities across the country, without similar outcomes.

What happened was unfortunate. It was also rare and not because people stayed in their cars.


Because, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

There is no reason to believe Zimmerman could know his attempt to keep a suspicious person in sight until police arrived would end the way this did. The vast majority of the time, it doesn't. The vast majority of the time, the suspicious person gets away -- just as Zimmerman had feared happened in this case.

The next most frequent outcome is the suspicious person and the person following them meet and discover there is no reason for alarm. They either leave with a hand shake and a new understanding over the misunderstanding or the person that was viewed as suspicious gets pissed and hurls a few insults as they part ways.

Another outcome is, the police arrive and are able to talk to the suspicious person and either satisfy themselves there is no cause for alarm or otherwise conclude the incident (arrest or advise the person to leave the property under threat of arrest for trespassing, etc...)

In rare incidents is anyone killed...or even assaulted.

The outcome of an event does not determine whether it was a good decision or not when analyzing risk. I don't expect guys like Zimmerman to undertake sound risk analysis when there is an opportunity to live out their cop fantasies, though.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I have no horse in this race. What concerns me is the vigilante laws or lack thereof for the state of Florida. If you want to play beat cop, you should not be able to carry a gun unless you are explicitly licensed to do so.

A law like that would cut through all this bullshit.

[Wild Cobra]

you are so fucking stupid.

he finally told his own lawyer that he had it........and that he'd already spent 54K........in 2 months. :lol
How good is the integrity of the reporter making the story?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

How does good is the integrity of the reporter making the story?

Zimmerman and his lawyer made the statements. Zimmerman said he had to move his family and his lawyer said Zimmerman had not disclosed the money he had received at the time of the hearing.

It's straight from the horses mouth.

[elbamba]

I have no horse in this race. What concerns me is the vigilante laws or lack thereof for the state of Florida. If you want to play beat cop, you should not be able to carry a gun unless you are explicitly licensed to do so.

A law like that would cut through all this bullshit.

Will vigilante laws cut it here? Lets suppose that Zimmerman is telling the truth and that he was not scouting his neighborhood but on his way to the store. In the process, he sees a young male in a hoodie looking into the window of a neighbor's house. A neighbor who had just previously had two teenage males break into her house, while she was at home, just a few months earlier. The male sees Zimmerman and appears to bolt, Zimmerman is returning to his car when the male confronts and severly beats up Zimmerman causing him to fear for his life, leading him to draw his gun and fire. (I realize that these are not the exact facts but for purposes of my question below, lets just pretend)

Would a vigilante law serve to convict him? Would a similar law than discourage people from helping out a neighbor, friend or family member in dire need of assistance in a similar situation?

[cantthinkofanything]

Will vigilante laws cut it here? Lets suppose that Zimmerman is telling the truth and that he was not scouting his neighborhood but on his way to the store. In the process, he sees a young male in a hoodie looking into the window of a neighbor's house. A neighbor who had just previously had two teenage males break into her house, while she was at home, just a few months earlier. The male sees Zimmerman and appears to bolt, Zimmerman is returning to his car when the male confronts and severly beats up Zimmerman causing him to fear for his life, leading him to draw his gun and fire. (I realize that these are not the exact facts but for purposes of my question below, lets just pretend)

Would a vigilante law serve to convict him? Would a similar law than discourage people from helping out a neighbor, friend or family member in dire need of assistance in a similar situation?

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a law that's going to cover all bases and be fair for every one in every single situation. I do believe that people should be able to use deadly force to defend themselves. But there needs to be some kind of check in place to prevent or lessen situations where the armed party can initiate events that lead to unnecessary killing. In situations without witnesses, it seems to leave a pretty big loophole for someone to target and kill someone else.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Will vigilante laws cut it here? Lets suppose that Zimmerman is telling the truth and that he was not scouting his neighborhood but on his way to the store. In the process, he sees a young male in a hoodie looking into the window of a neighbor's house. A neighbor who had just previously had two teenage males break into her house, while she was at home, just a few months earlier. The male sees Zimmerman and appears to bolt, Zimmerman is returning to his car when the male confronts and severly beats up Zimmerman causing him to fear for his life, leading him to draw his gun and fire. (I realize that these are not the exact facts but for purposes of my question below, lets just pretend)

Would a vigilante law serve to convict him? Would a similar law than discourage people from helping out a neighbor, friend or family member in dire need of assistance in a similar situation?

A vigilante law would have made him carrying a firearm while patrolling his neighborhood illegal. At that point he probably doesn't even follow the kid but if he still did as he even claims as he did, it would be cut and dry.

Equating that to mowing your lawn and seeing your neighbor get the crap beat out of he is fun but i do not see how it pertains. I am sure that there are all manner of problems with their gun ordinances. I am only talking about the one that is missing in this case.

Zimmerman decided to play cop, gun and all, and we know what the result is if not exactly how it got to that point.

[clambake]

the judge will rule on it. like i said from the beginning, this is florida and the guys name is zimmerman.