Zimmerman's account of the attack

[brimic]

http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmermans-reenactment-trayvon-martin-shooting-055354695--abc-news-topstories.html

"I didn't want him to keep slamming my head on the concrete so I kind of shifted. But when I shifted my jacket came up…and it exposed my firearm. That's when he said you are going to die tonight. He took one hand off my mouth, and slid it down my chest. I took my gun aimed it at him and fired."

Video of reenactment: http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/zimmerman-reenactment-on-feb-27/vcQxd/

[CNYCacher]

The comments on this video are telling just to what depths a person will go to convince themselves about what they want to see.

[Jocassee]

For those of you who have not already seen this article, Threeper "Dedicated Dad" (well known on a couple of the III/militia blogs) breaks down why the combination of Arizona Tea and Skittles our boy was carrying would have led to odd behavior and aggresion on that night.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/

[zahc]

It just proves he shouldn't have been carrying a gun. We all know that if you carry a gun, the bad guys will just take it away from you. If he hadn't been carrying a gun, Trayvon would still be alive and Zimmerman might only be a vegetable.

[Ben]

For those of you who have not already seen this article, Threeper "Dedicated Dad" (well known on a couple of the III/militia blogs) breaks down why the combination of Arizona Tea and Skittles our boy was carrying would have led to odd behavior and aggression on that night.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/

Very interesting link. I'd never heard of this "Lean" drug, and I'll take a guess that 90% of America hasn't either. Which leads right back to everyone speculating about events when they don't know background facts. Maybe Martin was on this stuff or maybe he wasn't at the time of the incident, but the background info could be somewhat damaging to his character.

I have to wonder if Obama has seen some of this stuff - like the Facebook posts - and is now regretting his initial comment about "If I had a son..."?

[SADShooter]

By extension, if Martin was under the influence of lean, what could have been the consequences had he encountered another, unarmed, pedestrian? All speculation, but if valid at all it's possible Zimmerman prevented harm to someone else in Martin's path that night, or a future incident(s).

[MicroBalrog]

For those of you who have not already seen this article, Threeper "Dedicated Dad" (well known on a couple of the III/militia blogs) breaks down why the combination of Arizona Tea and Skittles our boy was carrying would have led to odd behavior and aggresion on that night.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/

The article uses entirely random FB posts (like, where Travyon offers to meet up with another kid somewhere) to imply (although no evidence of this is in the actual FB posts) OMG THEY MIGHT BE MEETING UP TO USE DRUGS. They provide *zero actual evidence*.

Some people are stretching to invent additional evidence to exonerate 'their guy' even where there's no need in it - it's entirely possible Zimmerman is innocent after having shot a regular (if thuggish) kid, who attacked him because he himself was freaked out by Zimmerman's behavior.

[SADShooter]

Is this not a legitimate response to the initial assertion that the thirsty, sweet-toothed, innocent teenager was gunned down while strolling home form the store? Only the toxicology report will provide any factual clarity, but you can't be arguing that this is the only evidence of Martin's drug use.

[Perd Hapley]

The article uses entirely random FB posts (like, where Travyon offers to meet up with another kid somewhere) to imply (although no evidence of this is in the actual FB posts) OMG THEY MIGHT BE MEETING UP TO USE DRUGS. They provide *zero actual evidence*.

Some people are stretching to invent additional evidence to exonerate 'their guy' even where there's no need in it - it's entirely possible Zimmerman is innocent after having shot a regular (if thuggish) kid, who attacked him because he himself was freaked out by Zimmerman's behavior.

That would be a mischaracterization, because the blog post is actually much more substantive than that. Does it make an airtight case, or even meet the most rigorous journalistic standards? Maybe not, but you have no business expecting that. It's just a discussion amongst curious bystanders.

And, of course, it's still doing a better job of investigation than the old, ossified legacy media outlets.

[MicroBalrog]

And, of course, it's still doing a better job of investigation than the old, ossified legacy media outlets.

....you're really setting the bar low, are you?

[HankB]

Very interesting link. I'd never heard of this "Lean" drug, and I'll take a guess that 90% of America hasn't either. Which leads right back to everyone speculating about events when they don't know background facts. Maybe Martin was on this stuff or maybe he wasn't at the time of the incident, but the background info could be somewhat damaging to his character.

You don't need to guess about some rare drug - Martin was a) on suspension from school for a minor drug offense; and b) had marijuana traces in his bloodstream at the autopsy.

He was a druggie. That doesn't in and of itself establish him as dangerous and violent, but it takes him out of the "innocent angel" category.

And we still don't know for sure what happened between the end of the 911 call and the eyewitness that saw Martin beating the snot out of Zimmerman. Zimmerman's story is consistent with what physical evidence exists, but is otherwise uncorroborated; other versions which paint Zimmerman as the devil incarnate are simply made up fictions.

All we know for sure is that Zimmerman isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[MechAg94]

....you're really setting the bar low, are you?

I would say the media is the one that set the bar low.  It can't be raised because the media keeps grabbing onto it while trying to get even lower. 

[Ben]

You don't need to guess about some rare drug - Martin was a) on suspension from school for a minor drug offense; and b) had marijuana traces in his bloodstream at the autopsy.

He was a druggie. That doesn't in and of itself establish him as dangerous and violent, but it takes him out of the "innocent angel" category.

I wrote it poorly, but rather than say it was a rare drug, I was implying that at least among the "hip" crowd or whatever, this seems to be quite a common drug. I was trying to say 90% of "average America" has probably never heard of it.

I think most of us would never have put those grocery items together as a potential drug mix. It may still not mean anything to the case, since we don't know if and when he took the drug, but as others have pointed out, it's another side to the "the fresh-faced innocent kid walking home with a bag of candy". Where many would not consider his marijuana use an issue one way or another, they would possibly rethink things if he turned out to be a hardcore drug user.

[Perd Hapley]

I would say the media is the one that set the bar low.  It can't be raised because the media keeps grabbing onto it while trying to get even lower. 

   Funny, but sad, but true.

[lee n. field]

"I didn't want him to keep slamming my head on the concrete so I kind of shifted. But when I shifted my jacket came up…and it exposed my firearm. That's when he said you are going to die tonight. He took one hand off my mouth, and slid it down my chest. I took my gun aimed it at him and fired."

Ess Tee Eff Uuu.

[De Selby]

The video is just him saying what was already reported to be his story in the media - shouldn't have much effect on views of the case.  It also leaves out the trip from the truck to the back row of houses, which is the most critical part for his defence.

I do find it improbable that while screaming for help at that volume, he could hear what the other guy was saying to him. 

[De Selby]

http://www.gzlegalcase.com/documents/statements/audio_interview_0229_3.mp3

If you listen at 10:00, probably the fact that he lied to the investigator about following Martin initially did not help him.

The investigators on this audio are asking questions with an obvious mind to establish manslaughter; those questions are the ones where his "I don't remember" becomes more and more defeated.

Zimmerman was insane to do this interview at all.  He's putting literally the whole case against him on tape. 

[Jamisjockey]

The video is just him saying what was already reported to be his story in the media - shouldn't have much effect on views of the case.  It also leaves out the trip from the truck to the back row of houses, which is the most critical part for his defence.

I do find it improbable that while screaming for help at that volume, he could hear what the other guy was saying to him. 

And I find it improbable that you have an open mind about the case at this point.

You don't need to guess about some rare drug - Martin was a) on suspension from school for a minor drug offense; and b) had marijuana traces in his bloodstream at the autopsy.

He was a druggie. That doesn't in and of itself establish him as dangerous and violent, but it takes him out of the "innocent angel" category.

And we still don't know for sure what happened between the end of the 911 call and the eyewitness that saw Martin beating the snot out of Zimmerman. Zimmerman's story is consistent with what physical evidence exists, but is otherwise uncorroborated; other versions which paint Zimmerman as the devil incarnate are simply made up fictions.

All we know for sure is that Zimmerman isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Best surmation of the case, ever.

[De Selby]

Well, listening to the tapes, whatever our mindsets now, it's obvious that the police thought he was full of crap, and the more they questioned Zimmerman on the specifics, the more his answers became "I don't remember."  

The story I'd like to see investigated, but only after the trial, is why the DA and police chief disagreed with these investigators when they clearly saw a manslaughter case.

http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/statements/audio_interview_0229_1.mp3

At 21 minutes....the investigator asks "Do you think maybe putting your hand in your pocket while he was there set him off?"  

You listen to this tape, then listen to part 3, and you see exactly why the investigators concluded Zimmerman lied to them.  

[CNYCacher]

The video is just him saying what was already reported to be his story in the media - shouldn't have much effect on views of the case.  It also leaves out the trip from the truck to the back row of houses, which is the most critical part for his defence.

Did you watch the same video I did?  It was a step-by step reenactment of the entire thing.

Zimmerman was insane to do this interview at all.  He's putting literally the whole case against him on tape. 

Why do you think he decided to do the interview at this point?

[De Selby]

Did you watch the same video I did?  It was a step-by step reenactment of the entire thing.

Why do you think he decided to do the interview at this point?

Because he doesn't believe what he did broke the law.  Not belieiving you broke th pre law isn't the same thing as not breaking the law, which is why it's crazy to give an interview like this.

[CNYCacher]

Because he doesn't believe what he did broke the law.  Not belieiving you broke th pre law isn't the same thing as not breaking the law, which is why it's crazy to give an interview like this.

Do you think he adjusted his story because of the media backlash?

[Hawkmoon]

Very interesting link. I'd never heard of this "Lean" drug, and I'll take a guess that 90% of America hasn't either. Which leads right back to everyone speculating about events when they don't know background facts. Maybe Martin was on this stuff or maybe he wasn't at the time of the incident, but the background info could be somewhat damaging to his character.

I have to wonder if Obama has seen some of this stuff - like the Facebook posts - and is now regretting his initial comment about "If I had a son..."?

On the other hand, if Obama had a son, he'd very possibly be using the stuff, too.

That link was very interesting -- and frightening. I'm among those who had never heard of this stuff. This may explain why I get to wait for a manager to key in an override on the cash register any time I need to buy a bottle of cough medicine.

[De Selby]

Do you think he adjusted his story because of the media backlash?

He clearly spoke to a lawyer between the first night's interview and the days later videos and followups - notice how he emphasises that he wasn't following Martin.  His lawyer would rightly have told him that chasing or following Martin would, if proven, send him to the slammer under the circumstances.   

So his story becomes all about the address, which is an odd thing to check for behind the row of houses.  Also that story about Martin circling his truck is just bizarre; why wouldn't he have pointed that out on the phone?

There's a point where his denials of chasing Martin become so ridiculous that the investigator laughs at him.  It's pretty bad.

I think that to win, he'll have to prove that he had no intention of getting closer to Martin as Martin ran away.  I don't think he'll be able to do it.

His lawyers are likely getting the videos out in an attempt to avoid putting him on the stand.   The videos are a way to testify without getting up and being smashed on cross examination.

[CNYCacher]

He clearly spoke to a lawyer between the first night's interview and the days later videos and followups - notice how he emphasises that he wasn't following Martin.  His lawyer would rightly have told him that chasing or following Martin would, if proven, send him to the slammer under the circumstances.   

So his story becomes all about the address, which is an odd thing to check for behind the row of houses.  Also that story about Martin circling his truck is just bizarre; why wouldn't he have pointed that out on the phone?

There's a point where his denials of chasing Martin become so ridiculous that the investigator laughs at him.  It's pretty bad.

I think that to win, he'll have to prove that he had no intention of getting closer to Martin as Martin ran away.  I don't think he'll be able to do it.

His lawyers are likely getting the videos out in an attempt to avoid putting him on the stand.   The videos are a way to testify without getting up and being smashed on cross examination.

Oooh.  I never saw the video of the first night's interview.  Got a link?