New Witness...TRAYVON was beating Zimmerman up!

[Emma]

It's a 911 call, you retard.

Good grief.

And not being sworn in means they aren't cops. You're doubly retarded. They're employed as police technicians. But they aren't cops.

I know, this is really difficult stuff.

You post false information, and call her a retard.

It was NOT 911.

It was the NON-EMERGENCY number at the SPD, airbrain.

So why does everyone refer to it as a 911 call, and the person he's talking to as a 911 dispatcher?

Hmmmmm...

"A transcript of the actual recording of the call between Zimmerman and the 911 dispatcher shows the version that was aired was significantly modified.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nbc-news-producer-fired-editing-george-zimmerman-911-call-article-1.1057674#ixzz1rY2s8eH0

It doesn't matter what that headline says, he called the police department directly, not 911. Hence the person answering "Sanford police department"; you'll notice in the tapes of the other calls, they are all answered, "911, do you need police, fire or medical?".

GRAPHIC: Trayvon Martin 911 calls released | News - Home

 

[Gadawg73]

After several weeks of trying every way in the world to manufacture a case against Zimmerman, the police, special prosecutor and FBI are unable to do so. Arresting him and trying him based SOLELY on popular opinion would violate his rights and give him a basis for a massive lawsuit against the city, state and federal government.

According to the news, the family is starting to accept that Zimmerman can't be prosecuted. They are exploring a civil suit against the homeowner's association.

And they may have a good wrongful death case.

Of course Joe and Marc and many here have no clue as to the burden of proof in a civil case be far different than a criminal trial.

From their posts they believe that the preponderance of the evidence is the standard in ALL court cases.

 

[koshergrl]

You post false information, and call her a retard.

It was NOT 911.

It was the NON-EMERGENCY number at the SPD, airbrain.

So why does everyone refer to it as a 911 call, and the person he's talking to as a 911 dispatcher?

Hmmmmm...

"A transcript of the actual recording of the call between Zimmerman and the 911 dispatcher shows the version that was aired was significantly modified.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nbc-news-producer-fired-editing-george-zimmerman-911-call-article-1.1057674#ixzz1rY2s8eH0

It doesn't matter what that headline says, he called the police department directly, not 911. Hence the person answering "Sanford police department"; you'll notice in the tapes of the other calls, they are all answered, "911, do you need police, fire or medical?".

GRAPHIC: Trayvon Martin 911 calls released | News - Home

Once again.

You can call 911 and get the police department. Because the dispatchers work for the police department.

But they are not cops.

Am I getting through? Hello?

 

[koshergrl]

The lady who cleans the station is an employee of the police department, too...she is also not a cop.

The maintenance guy..he works for the police department..and is not a cop.

Hello??

 

[KissMy]

Oh, I understand that perfectly well, and so would most people. If a cop tells you not to do something, YOU DON'T DO IT!

Unless your Barney Fife Zimmerman, who was just out to show what a crimefighter he was.

So they told him to "stand down", which they didn't but let us say they did.
Then someone jumps him and is allowed to break his nose and smash his head and he is not allowed to defend himself in any way because he was told to "stand down".

You are a complete dumbass if you believe that is the law or that analysis of yours has any credibility.

he is allowed to defend himself, but not allowed to kill the person he is in a hand to hand fight with....unless the other person is trying to kill him....an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life....

beating someone up or in a fist fight with them is NOT legal permission to pull out your gun and KILL that person.....PERIOD.

Martin did not have a mark on his body. Obviously Zimmerman was not able to meet force with force. He must have been stunned from the sucker punch. It is also clear by his screams for help that he was in fear & trying to retreat. Martin continued to try & harm or kill a subdued person who was not a threat to him. No way in hell even half a jury of 12 will ever say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It takes all 12 jurors believing beyond a reasonable doubt. All a defense attorney has to say is put yourself on the ground in Zimmerman's position.

 

[Care4all]

So they told him to "stand down", which they didn't but let us say they did.
Then someone jumps him and is allowed to break his nose and smash his head and he is not allowed to defend himself in any way because he was told to "stand down".

You are a complete dumbass if you believe that is the law or that analysis of yours has any credibility.

he is allowed to defend himself, but not allowed to kill the person he is in a hand to hand fight with....unless the other person is trying to kill him....an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life....

beating someone up or in a fist fight with them is NOT legal permission to pull out your gun and KILL that person.....PERIOD.

You do not know the law either.
Under Florida statute: the concept of "disparity of force" ALLOWS deadly force against an unarmed opponent, and this statute even describes ANY object someone has that they hit someone else with as that person being armed, if the person that is being attacked and armed has reason to believe he is at risk of 'SERIOUS BODILY INJURY" they can use deadly force.

And the witnesses corroborate Zimmerman so there you go.

Martin was beating him with a Rock or another object? I hadn't heard that one....

Maybe zimmerman was being beaten to a pulp, therefore had to use deadly force against him....I haven't seen or read that this was the case....nor heard any eyewitness account that this was the case....but if it is the case, then zimmerman had the right to kill....otherwise, he didn't have the right, under the law, to kill martin at point blank range....time and a trial perhaps, hopefully, will air this all out.

Where was Martin shot and at what range....has this come out yet?

 

[Emma]

Once again.

You can call 911 and get the police department. Because the dispatchers work for the police department.

But they are not cops.

Am I getting through? Hello?

Stop. You're making yourself look more ignorant than usual. The 911 call center is run through the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, NOT the Sanford police department, dumbass.

:::. Seminole County Sheriff's Office - Donald F. Eslinger, Sheriff .:::

The Communications Division which operates the 911 call center and dispatches 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In addition to unincorporated Seminole County, service calls are also handled and dispatched for the cities of Altamonte Springs, Casselberry, Longwood, Sanford and Casselberry and their associated police departments;

 

[California Girl]

So they told him to "stand down", which they didn't but let us say they did.
Then someone jumps him and is allowed to break his nose and smash his head and he is not allowed to defend himself in any way because he was told to "stand down".

You are a complete dumbass if you believe that is the law or that analysis of yours has any credibility.

he is allowed to defend himself, but not allowed to kill the person he is in a hand to hand fight with....unless the other person is trying to kill him....an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life....

beating someone up or in a fist fight with them is NOT legal permission to pull out your gun and KILL that person.....PERIOD.

Martin did not have a mark on his body. Obviously Zimmerman was not able to meet force with force. He must have been stunned from the sucker punch. It is also clear by his screams for help that he was in fear & trying to retreat. Martin continued to try & harm or kill a subdued person who was not a threat to him. No way in hell even half a jury of 12 will ever say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It takes all 12 jurors believing beyond a reasonable doubt. All a defense attorney has to say is put yourself on the ground in Zimmerman's position.

There is no 'obviously' in this case. You are doing exactly what others are doing... you are assuming facts that are not facts.

There are a variety of scenarios.... that Zimmerman was, indeed, 'stunned' by either a punch to the face or having his head slammed against the pavement. We don't know that, although.... from the police reports, we do know that some kind of struggle happened. That, at one stage, Zimmerman must have been lying on his back on the ground - because the police report observed that he had blood on both his face and back of the head, and that the back of his jacket was wet and grass stained. Therefore, we can reasonably opine that he must have been hit in the face, and sustained some injury to the back of his head... and that he was on the ground, on his back.... that's clear from the reports.

I'll wait for further information - from official sources - before I decide what happened.

 

[Emma]

There is no 'obviously' in this case. You are doing exactly what others are doing... you are assuming facts that are not facts.

There are a variety of scenarios.... that Zimmerman was, indeed, 'stunned' by either a punch to the face or having his head slammed against the pavement. We don't know that, although.... from the police reports, we do know that some kind of struggle happened. That, at one stage, Zimmerman must have been lying on his back on the ground - because the police report observed that he had blood on both his face and back of the head, and that the back of his jacket was wet and grass stained. Therefore, we can reasonably opine that he must have been hit in the face, and sustained some injury to the back of his head... and that he was on the ground, on his back.... that's clear from the reports.

I'll wait for further information - from official sources - before I decide what happened.

Martin's father said that police told him Trayvon was straddling Zimmerman and kneeling on his arms to pin them down while he punched Zimmerman in the face, after which Zimmerman shot him. That he could shoot Martin given that description of how Martin sat on Zimmerman and pinned his arms down doesn't make sense. The police report is only a partial release, and there is no way of knowing if that is Zimmerman's account of what happened or if that is how he re-enacted the attack for police or if Martin's father simply misunderstood the detectives' account of what they believe happened.

 

[Care4all]

So they told him to "stand down", which they didn't but let us say they did.
Then someone jumps him and is allowed to break his nose and smash his head and he is not allowed to defend himself in any way because he was told to "stand down".

You are a complete dumbass if you believe that is the law or that analysis of yours has any credibility.

he is allowed to defend himself, but not allowed to kill the person he is in a hand to hand fight with....unless the other person is trying to kill him....an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life....

beating someone up or in a fist fight with them is NOT legal permission to pull out your gun and KILL that person.....PERIOD.

Martin did not have a mark on his body. Obviously Zimmerman was not able to meet force with force. He must have been stunned from the sucker punch. It is also clear by his screams for help that he was in fear & trying to retreat. Martin continued to try & harm or kill a subdued person who was not a threat to him. No way in hell even half a jury of 12 will ever say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It takes all 12 jurors believing beyond a reasonable doubt. All a defense attorney has to say is put yourself on the ground in Zimmerman's position.

so you are speculating that zimmerman could not punch him but could retrieve his gun to kill him?

Was zimmerman going to be killed if he did not have a gun or would zimmerman have managed to actually fight the guy off enough to prevent himself from being killed, if Martin was actually trying to kill zimmerman?

so many unanswered questions....

where was Martin Shot and at what range, has this come out?

 

[KissMy]

he is allowed to defend himself, but not allowed to kill the person he is in a hand to hand fight with....unless the other person is trying to kill him....an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life....

beating someone up or in a fist fight with them is NOT legal permission to pull out your gun and KILL that person.....PERIOD.

Martin did not have a mark on his body. Obviously Zimmerman was not able to meet force with force. He must have been stunned from the sucker punch. It is also clear by his screams for help that he was in fear & trying to retreat. Martin continued to try & harm or kill a subdued person who was not a threat to him. No way in hell even half a jury of 12 will ever say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It takes all 12 jurors believing beyond a reasonable doubt. All a defense attorney has to say is put yourself on the ground in Zimmerman's position.

There is no 'obviously' in this case. You are doing exactly what others are doing... you are assuming facts that are not facts.

There are a variety of scenarios.... that Zimmerman was, indeed, 'stunned' by either a punch to the face or having his head slammed against the pavement. We don't know that, although.... from the police reports, we do know that some kind of struggle happened. That, at one stage, Zimmerman must have been lying on his back on the ground - because the police report observed that he had blood on both his face and back of the head, and that the back of his jacket was wet and grass stained. Therefore, we can reasonably opine that he must have been hit in the face, and sustained some injury to the back of his head... and that he was on the ground, on his back.... that's clear from the reports.

I'll wait for further information - from official sources - before I decide what happened.

Based solely on the 911 tapes & police reports so far. Can you say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

 

[Ravi]

Once again.

You can call 911 and get the police department. Because the dispatchers work for the police department.

But they are not cops.

Am I getting through? Hello?

Stop. You're making yourself look more ignorant than usual. The 911 call center is run through the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, NOT the Sanford police department, dumbass.

:::. Seminole County Sheriff's Office - Donald F. Eslinger, Sheriff .:::

The Communications Division which operates the 911 call center and dispatches 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In addition to unincorporated Seminole County, service calls are also handled and dispatched for the cities of Altamonte Springs, Casselberry, Longwood, Sanford and Casselberry and their associated police departments;

Impossible.

 

[paperview]

Martin did not have a mark on his body. Obviously Zimmerman was not able to meet force with force. He must have been stunned from the sucker punch. It is also clear by his screams for help that he was in fear & trying to retreat. Martin continued to try & harm or kill a subdued person who was not a threat to him. No way in hell even half a jury of 12 will ever say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It takes all 12 jurors believing beyond a reasonable doubt. All a defense attorney has to say is put yourself on the ground in Zimmerman's position.

There is no 'obviously' in this case. You are doing exactly what others are doing... you are assuming facts that are not facts.

There are a variety of scenarios.... that Zimmerman was, indeed, 'stunned' by either a punch to the face or having his head slammed against the pavement. We don't know that, although.... from the police reports, we do know that some kind of struggle happened. That, at one stage, Zimmerman must have been lying on his back on the ground - because the police report observed that he had blood on both his face and back of the head, and that the back of his jacket was wet and grass stained. Therefore, we can reasonably opine that he must have been hit in the face, and sustained some injury to the back of his head... and that he was on the ground, on his back.... that's clear from the reports.

I'll wait for further information - from official sources - before I decide what happened.

Based solely on the 911 tapes & police reports so far. Can you say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

 

[KissMy]

There is no 'obviously' in this case. You are doing exactly what others are doing... you are assuming facts that are not facts.

There are a variety of scenarios.... that Zimmerman was, indeed, 'stunned' by either a punch to the face or having his head slammed against the pavement. We don't know that, although.... from the police reports, we do know that some kind of struggle happened. That, at one stage, Zimmerman must have been lying on his back on the ground - because the police report observed that he had blood on both his face and back of the head, and that the back of his jacket was wet and grass stained. Therefore, we can reasonably opine that he must have been hit in the face, and sustained some injury to the back of his head... and that he was on the ground, on his back.... that's clear from the reports.

I'll wait for further information - from official sources - before I decide what happened.

Based solely on the 911 tapes & police reports so far. Can you say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.032 - Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

 

[Care4all]

Based solely on the 911 tapes & police reports so far. Can you say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.032 - Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

it's not clear if this was Justifiable....the police did not think it was justifiable from what I read so far.....therefore, imo, he should have been charged as the police intended and a trial should have taken place to determine such....

 

[paperview]

Based solely on the 911 tapes & police reports so far. Can you say Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.032 - Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

Have they determined yet if it was a justifiable use of force?

I'm pretty sure the answer to that is a big En O.

 

[KissMy]

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.032 - Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

it's not clear if this was Justifiable....the police did not think it was justifiable from what I read so far.....therefore, imo, he should have been charged as the police intended and a trial should have taken place to determine such....

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.012 - A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

 

[California Girl]

There is no 'obviously' in this case. You are doing exactly what others are doing... you are assuming facts that are not facts.

There are a variety of scenarios.... that Zimmerman was, indeed, 'stunned' by either a punch to the face or having his head slammed against the pavement. We don't know that, although.... from the police reports, we do know that some kind of struggle happened. That, at one stage, Zimmerman must have been lying on his back on the ground - because the police report observed that he had blood on both his face and back of the head, and that the back of his jacket was wet and grass stained. Therefore, we can reasonably opine that he must have been hit in the face, and sustained some injury to the back of his head... and that he was on the ground, on his back.... that's clear from the reports.

I'll wait for further information - from official sources - before I decide what happened.

Martin's father said that police told him Trayvon was straddling Zimmerman and kneeling on his arms to pin them down while he punched Zimmerman in the face, after which Zimmerman shot him. That he could shoot Martin given that description of how Martin sat on Zimmerman and pinned his arms down doesn't make sense. The police report is only a partial release, and there is no way of knowing if that is Zimmerman's account of what happened or if that is how he re-enacted the attack for police or if Martin's father simply misunderstood the detectives' account of what they believe happened.

Martin's father wasn't there. He doesn't know what happened. Could that have happened? Yea.... I can see that Martin may have been on top of Zimmerman... that Zimmerman may have gotten one hand free - and, in genuine fear of his life, went for his gun.

If - as is stated on the police reports - Zimmerman had head injuries from the struggle - he may well have been temporarily dazed enough to feel justified in going for his gun. Particularly if he thought Martin was trying to get it from him.

Seems to me, that speculating about what may or may not have happened achieves nothing. The only thing that matters is establishing the facts and weighing those facts to establish whether there is a charge to process. If there is, fine. If there is not, then that should be fine too.

 

[FuelRod]

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.032 - Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

Have they determined yet if it was a justifiable use of force?

I'm pretty sure the answer to that is a big En O.

I think that "stand your ground" law has so much gray area they do not know what to think. I am surprised there has not been some kind of statement by the DA up to this point.

 

[California Girl]

The measure to charge him now is "probable cause."

It is up to a trial jury to use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" measure.


Just throwing that out there.

2011 Florida Statutes - 776.032 - Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

it's not clear if this was Justifiable....the police did not think it was justifiable from what I read so far.....therefore, imo, he should have been charged as the police intended and a trial should have taken place to determine such....

It is not for the police to decide charges. That is the duty of the state. It is for the state to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to charge.

You are entitled to your opinion, but since you nor I are in possession of all the facts, any opinion is based on insufficient evidence. And it is not wise to form opinions based on insufficient evidence.