Home > Uncategorized > BCC List Diaspora part 9

BCC List Diaspora part 9

Comment as you wish…

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. unitron
    April 25, 2013 at 10:46 AM

    Once more, dear friends, into the breech.

    • April 25, 2013 at 1:01 PM

      @unitron

      Once more, dear friends, into the breech.

      Methinks sire you are confused and ’tis: “Once more, dear friends, unto the breach”… or have my wits become too dulled to perceive thou art but having a game with your readers?

      • unitron
        April 25, 2013 at 1:16 PM

        Well, maybe Shakespeare wrote it that way, but when Henry, in The Fantastiks, says it, it’s “into”.

        • April 25, 2013 at 1:52 PM

          And did Henry, in the Fantastiks, spell “breach” as “breech”? just asking, ; – )

        • unitron
          April 25, 2013 at 2:03 PM

          No (since he didn’t write the script), but he pronounced it that way.

          : – )

        • April 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM

          : – )

      • unitron
        April 25, 2013 at 1:19 PM

        Although perhaps first I should have replied with Henry’s line just before that:

        “A touch, a touch, I do confess it.”

        • April 25, 2013 at 3:00 PM

          “A touch, a touch, I do confess” (sorry, no “it”)

          Just to set the records straight on another teeny weeny slip… WTF was Henry V doing in Denmark posing as Hamlet’s brother King Claudius’ Lord Chamberlain Polounius’ son Laertes. ; – )

        • unitron
          April 25, 2013 at 4:42 PM

          See, that’s the thing about the broken-down old actor Henry in The Fantastiks, he’s always mis-quoting Shakespeare or whoever.

          About 30-ish years ago I was going to play him in a local production and vaguely remember (or after all this time likely mis-remember) some of the lines.

        • April 25, 2013 at 6:03 PM

          Capito. Never heard of it until a fleeting check turned up a very popular long running show in the US but which didn’t go down very well here, or rather it did… i.e. very quickly! We Brits tend to take our Shakespeare like our whisky, neat.

  2. bgesq
    April 25, 2013 at 12:15 PM

    yay! please follow-

  3. bgesq
    April 25, 2013 at 12:16 PM

    btw, thank you!

  4. April 25, 2013 at 1:23 PM

    Thanks for the new thread. @ thcoupi: I agree that the “snowman” or “snowmama” figure seems to have a head made of the second streetlamp, and a “chests” made of resident’s driveway lights. The question is, which resident? I think it may be W6’s house. I’m pretty sure it’s not W11’s house. I think that unit is in the blind spot created by the sconce lights poolside.

    Until tests are conducted on the scene to determine what may have been seen or could be seen and what couldn’t, I don’t think we can know for sure if GZ reversed his car or did some sort of Y turn for certain. We can speculate and listen to the sounds on the NEN call recording but these speculations are always going to be subjective. I don’t see any noise analysis as ever rising about the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt in a jury’s eye.

    Yet I do feel that a jury could be made to see that GZ’s car movements caused the teen to run away in fear. It’s simply the best scenario to explain all the evidence and testimony and GZ’s inconsistent and contradictory statements to SPD investigators, especially including his hand-marked map. Almost ANY alternate theory of GZ’s movements fails completely to explain the timing of the NEN call and the actions he seems to describe, most notably “by the clubhouse now” and “he’s running (and I can still see him).” George himself wanted SPD to believe he moved his car during the call to NEN. He just lied about where from, in order to omit the idea that he moved up behind the teen who was clearly just walking home.

    There simply isn’t enough time to get from the clubhouse vicinity to the cut thru vicinity without the car moving along with the pedestrian in concert somehow. GZ’s own story makes no sense. That leaves very little room for other scenarios.

    • April 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM

      It is definitely from JohnW06’s garage. It is the only one that line’s up with the street light at the east curve and the EP camera. There simply is no other option.

      It is interesting also because it means that the lights from JenniferW11’s are not visible, which implies that her house is mostly behind the white spot on the top-left corner of the EP video. Therefore, most of the north side of TTL is hidden (http://i.imgur.com/RVxHwZJ.png).

      Finally, it limits the number of possibilities for vehicles to shine their headlights on the EP camera when they face the pool.

      • April 25, 2013 at 4:05 PM

        That’s why I always felt the light event that blooms the pool sconce/ constant flare was GZ’s car just starting to make the corner and drive straight, and that he turned off his headlights but still cruised up a lot closer to the mail kiosk. Another intimidating move on his part if TM saw it. One might even call it “creepy.”

        I’ve diagrammed the blind spot extensively in the past on my flickr site. This screen grab from the misguided videographer helps establish that to some degree my diagrams and our theory here is all the same.

        noting the part of TTL that seems to be obscured by constant flare

        This photo illustration is from last september. It used some B-roll footage from an interview with Frank Taaffe to stitch together a view from near the pool, more or less in line with the pool cam but closer and in the daytime.

        I wish that someone would stand under the pool cam in the daytme and take some photos to show how all this lines up. But aerial photos show the same thing.

        • April 25, 2013 at 5:57 PM

          I have to admit that I have been skeptical of our ability to position GZ’s truck along the E-W part of TTL.

          I’m now, more inclined to say that he probably parked near the West curve. This is the only way I see for GZ’s truck to create that blooming white spot. In fact, there is another way, which is to drive closer to the south edge.

          Anyhow, for the bloom to disappear, GZ must have either switched his headlights to park, or he must have backed up into the blind spot caused by the pool lamp at the top left corner of the frame.

          I’m wondering if the presence of the parked Ridgeline could cause some detectable changes in the patterns of light event caused by vehicles driving on TTL. The truck should have forced people to drive near the south side of TTL which is within the view range.

        • amsterdam1234
          April 27, 2013 at 1:56 PM

          @tchoupi,
          I think the car was parked at the bend, passed the area where the light could be seen in the ep video but before passing the eph. Just when the bloom disappears in the eastpool video, there is a light event in the eph video. Just the light on the pavement.

  5. April 25, 2013 at 6:15 PM

    Whonoze question concerning GZ’s blood found on the back of his shirt (http://i.imgur.com/yEGlHlU.png): “Could the blood on the back have soaked through from the front when the shirt was taken off and laid out flat like it is in thr picture??”

    Amsterdam answer to Whonoze: “The stains are tiny and GZ didn’t change his clothes until after 11 pm that evening. Those stains would have been dry by then.”

    ###

    This is a good point. All the blood stains on the back of his shirt must have been made early. GZ clearly did not bleed much on his clothes. His shirt was protected by his jacket. So, those stains are not made from blood dripping from his head wounds. The blood has either 1) been transported there, or 2) it comes from wounds on his the back made during the ground fight, or 3) it was already there when the confrontation started.

  6. unitron
    April 26, 2013 at 10:08 AM

    If you hover the mouse pointer over this link, and click “open in new tab” or “open in new window” it’ll take you to a fairly good, simple tutorial about how to put stuff in bold or intalics, or to do

    BLOCKQUOTES

    or create links like that one to webpages in comments here, and combined with what you learn there about the anchor tag and

  7. unitron
    April 26, 2013 at 10:21 AM

    And if you accidently hit “I have no idea which, but it seems to involve the space key” wrong key combination while a WordPress comment box is jumping around, you wind up with a premature submission.

    So as I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted,

    If you hover the mouse pointer over this link, right-click, and click “open in new tab” or “open in new window” it’ll take you to a fairly good, simple tutorial about how to put stuff in bold or intalics, or to do

    BLOCKQUOTES

    or create links like that one to webpages in comments here, and combined with what you learn there about the anchor tag and the acronym for HTML referrer, you can hover the mouse pointer over that link, right-click, and click “copy link location” or the IE or Chrome equivalent, which will put the link into the clipboard, and create your own comment with that tutorial page in a link over in the lounge, where they might also benefit from it.

    (I’d do it myself, but…)

    Of course you can also go to that page, highlight the URL address in the address or location bar on that page, and right click and copy it as well.

    But either way, you can create a link from which the professor’s pupils may profit as well.

    I cant’ decide whether or not to to say

    “Tell ’em unitron sent you”

    : – )

    And if bcclist ever sprouts a new page, someone remind me to post the link there as well.

    • April 27, 2013 at 8:16 AM

      Whoopee… I’m being spoilt for choice!
      Now I can decide whether to use a bold “whoopee”,
      or a more elegant and restrained “whoopee”;
      and when necessary I can now define my “whoopee
      and even quote another’s

      “whoopee”

      but should I make a mistake I have a “forget that” whoopie,
      or to affirm I’m right an emphatic SYG “whoopee”,
      and for an even stronger statement an accumulative “whoopee”,
      but my human nature as it is I’ll likely forget or be too lazy and simply use the usual boring “whoopee”.
      ; – )

      • April 27, 2013 at 8:20 AM

        Dang a flaw! Failure. Underline didn’t work here while it did on my WP blog where I tested it first, so missing underline under the SYG whoopee and the accumulative one! Anyone know why?

        • unitron
          April 27, 2013 at 10:28 AM

          When in doubt, blame WordPress.

          One additional note:

          Some places, not necessarily ones that use the WordPress software, you need to do HTML the original way (at least I think it’s the original way–Tim Berners-Lee and I have never swapped emails) and use uppercase letters for the A and the B and the I and the HREF and so on.

          And some places let you use the less than (SHIFT+comma key) followed by a P, followed by a greater than (SHIFT+period key–I think you Brits call it a full stop) to insert a hard paragraph break, and you don’t follow it with another tag with a / to turn it off because it’s by definition a one-time thing. If you need two of them (though most places will ignore the second one and only give you the one extra blank line), you just put in anoher LT-P-GT.

          Using a BR instead of a P will force a line break.

          Again, that’s if the site observes that rule.

          The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them.

          Now, let’s see if/how WP mangles this post.

          : – )

        • April 28, 2013 at 12:09 AM

          Ta for the “tips”?! I see you have gone into HTML in some depth with or without emails to and from our Sir Tim. I would use them if I hadn’t found an easier way even if like yours it’s not completely reliable. As you say, wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many, like my standard Spanish keyboard that has both greater and less than symbols together on one key next to the left shift.

        • unitron
          April 27, 2013 at 10:32 AM

          That line about standards should have been followed by a closing “sarcasm” tag–LT, forward slash, the word “sarcasm”, GT– without an opening “sarcasm tag, since there really is no real “sarcasm” tag, but apparently just enclosing it in LT and GT was enough to make it disappear, so

          The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them. /sarcasm

        • April 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM

          It depends on the theme of the blog. They’re all written by different people, and have different features. Maybe the guy who wrote this one didn’t feel a need for underlining (but I’ll try anyway). .My Thank You up above was meant to be red but that doesn’t work here either.

          Strangely, the blog quoted by unitron used “b” for blockquote whereas it seems to do bold instead, at least on Fred’s theme.

        • unitron
          April 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM

          Strangely, the blog quoted by unitron used “b” for blockquote whereas it seems to do bold instead, at least on Fred’s theme.

          If you mean the page at

          http://wpbtips.wordpress.com/2010/05/23/html-allowed-in-comments-2/

          perhaps you misread it.

          It specifically mentions b for bold and blockquote for quotes.

          Now if only it had something about how to activate a “preview” feature.

        • April 27, 2013 at 8:10 PM

          @aussiekay
          Hate to admit it but I cheated. I typed my text in the comment editor of my WP account. Select the text you want to format/link and click attribute desired in the menu and it incorporates corresponding HTML code. Then I cut and pasted it here. Neither indent (OL) nor bullet point (LI) worked in my blog.mAs unitron notes, “When in doubt blame WP”.

  8. April 27, 2013 at 6:08 AM

    Thanks, unitron

  9. unitron
    April 27, 2013 at 10:36 AM

    This would be a pretty great thread if people would only quit cluttering it up with posts about the Martin/Zimmerman case.

    : – )

    : – )

    : – )

    • April 30, 2013 at 9:19 PM

      The undeniable style/quirk makes me doubt an impostor, so have you re-coloured your avatar overnight or developed what in my younger days was in colloquial terms referred to as jaundice to mean hepatitis A, B or C?

      • unitron
        April 30, 2013 at 9:42 PM

        Good eye! Insist on the original! Accept no substitute!

        It turns out I had originally selected from somewhere on the internet the avatar pic you now see to use at Huffington Post (this was a while back) and when I set one up for WordPress I got a different pic of the same character “from somewhere on the internet” (I really don’t remember where I got either one), without realizing at the time that I hadn’t found the same one again but a different one.

        I decided to consolidate, and settled on this one.

        Apparently it’s retroactive after a few hours, because shortly after the change I checked this post from last December:

        http://frederickleatherman.com/2012/12/01/defense-raises-tempest-in-a-teapot-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case/#comment-41819

        and it still had the old one with the purple background, but now has the current one.

        • April 30, 2013 at 10:18 PM

          @unitron
          Thank you. I’d say an exceptional eye is indispensable in my profession but methinks that from magenta to yellow is too big a leap for most to miss. (Tickles? I shall try not to capitalise you handle ever again)

        • April 30, 2013 at 11:01 PM

          Ok, my eyes not so good anymore. It’s Professor Frink (I’m not an avid follower of the Simpsons) and in your old avatar skin wasn’t magenta there is a magenta circle behind his head. Google image search with his name brings the old one about 18 lines of images down, (after my goof dare I say I’m a good researcher) with a surprising result if you select to “visit page”!

          Have you gotten through all of SOTI’s hearing tapes yet? I haven’t, but the few I did I noticed he was pretty verbal today! I was very interested in the lack of GPS and the tape apparently being cleaned up, but too late for me now.

        • unitron
          April 30, 2013 at 11:09 PM

          I TiVo’ed HLN, but most of the time they didn’t fill with commercials they filled with talking heads instead of just feeding the hearing itself, so I’m painfully working my way through his youtube offerings now, for lack of a better alternative, but apparently he’s auditioning for a revival of MST3K.

  10. April 27, 2013 at 3:47 PM

    What exactly happened that night?
    I just don’t know.

    Why is Trayvon Martin dead?
    That I do know. IMO George Zimmerman profiled, pursued and killed him.

    What was Trayvon predominantly doing?
    Walking home with snacks from the store.

    What was GZ predominantly doing?
    Profiling and pursuing a kid who was walking home with snacks from the store.

    What’s the most sinister thing Trayvon could have been doing?
    Standing his ground.

    What’s the most sinister thing GZ could have been doing?
    Deliberately profiling people like Trayvon, and lying about it later.

    What’s the most innocent thing Trayvon could have been doing?
    Walking home and talking to his friend on the phone.

    Who was on the pathway to their home?
    The teenager with the snacks and a lighter and 40 dollars in his pocket.

    Who was out of his car and not on a path back to it, as the NEN call taker suggested?
    The man with the handgun and an aggressive history and behavior pattern and who had just “doubled back” to follow the teen with his car while describing him as a punk, asshole and on drugs and possibly carrying a weapon and possibly involved in recent burglaries.

    What’s the most innocent thing GZ could have been doing?
    Mistakenly profiling a kid who was walking home with snacks.

    Anything GZ did was a criminal act.
    Anything TM did was the act of a law abiding citizen.

    Who is a punk, asshole and probably on drugs?

    Who doubled back?

    Who had something in their waistband?

    Who was engaging in criminal acts that night?

    Who is the liar?

    Who is guilty?

  11. April 27, 2013 at 7:40 PM

    Closing statements already, Willis? trial doesn’t start for another 41 days 😉

    tick. tock.

    • April 27, 2013 at 9:08 PM

      Exactly. It’s called pre-visualization for getting the result you want.

    • April 27, 2013 at 11:43 PM

      @aussiekay

      Good idea to practice, but I presume the prosecutor won’t be using “IMO” because it wouldn’t sound too confident!

      • April 29, 2013 at 3:10 PM

        Just need to add a stressed sarcastic H into it, IMHO.

        Anyway we have a bit of time to edit it to perfection.

        ~ aussie
        wordpress adds the kay, can’t help it.

        • unitron
          April 29, 2013 at 3:31 PM

          “~ aussie
          wordpress adds the kay, can’t help it.”

          You might want to find something to use for your WP avatar that you like, and that will stand out, and then you’ll be recognizeable as that person everywhere that uses WP comment handling software.

          While you’re signed into WP (not gravatar), go to

          https://wordpress.com/?ssl=forced#!/settings/public-profile/

          and you can set what they call the Public Display Name to what you want (which I’m assuming would be “aussie”), and it should be universal at all WP running sites, at least going forward–previous posts will likely retain “aussiekay”.

          But since there is (or was) another aussie posting at CTH, I recommend a unique avatar to avoid any possible confusion.

  12. April 29, 2013 at 9:50 PM

    Thanks unitron. I’ve seen that person; has a white cat as avatar. The only usable image I have lying around at the moment is of a cat (not even mine) so I can’t really use that. I’ll think of something later, or keep an eye out for something I like.

  13. wassointeresting
    April 30, 2013 at 12:10 AM

    Been tending to real life and feel so out of the loop. Just found out GZ will be in court tomorrow (or technically today)? And I read somewhere that he might actually speak/answer questions? Hope somebody will watch it live and give a recap.

  14. April 30, 2013 at 2:50 PM

    Evidence-wise, not a whole lot of new information was let loose in today’s hearing. From the sidelines however it appeared that the defense had a very very bad day.

    Of course the headline is that GZ stood up in court and told the judge in no uncertain terms that he did not want a immunity hearing. We kinda knew that already, but this makes it crystal clear IMO that he is hoping for a defense that can say to a jury that the state has not proven murder 2 – NOT that the defense is going to prove self-defense.

    There was some slight back and forth regarding the GPS data, and what I was able to glean from it was that there is no “they went thataway” map in the defense’s possession, and that there is unlikely to be on in the prosecution’s possession either. But time will tell.

    The defense tried to claim they were harmed by not getting a report about the GPS that said at some point TM’s cell signal went to a different tower than the one closest to the 7Eleven or the RATL, and that this somehow was evidence of TM not taking a direct route from store to RATL, but of course this isn’t really proof of anything other than the idea that cell phones bounce signals around for various reasons – traffic load, radio interference, etc.

    • April 30, 2013 at 6:23 PM

      So, it looks like there is no GPS information from TM’s cellphone. What about GZ’s phone?

      • April 30, 2013 at 6:57 PM

        That wasn’t discussed. But like I said above, what I gathered was that as of this point the defense possesses no “he went thataway” accurate map of TM’s movements. And since the point of the whole hearing was to determine more or less that the defense had gotten all the discovery from the state that it deserves, I’d say this may be the deal: there are records of the calls and which towers they were routed through, one tower at a time. No triangulation.

        But like always, we are speculating until we hear more.

        • amsterdam1234
          April 30, 2013 at 7:26 PM

          I don’t think they know what they are talking about. Last time the defense was clearly talking about gps( satellite) data. This time they were saying Trayvon’s phone was bouncing off another cell tower. We can’t say anything based on what they were saying in court today. With or without GPS, there would be cell tower information.

        • amsterdam1234
          April 30, 2013 at 8:23 PM

          I justed started listening to the early part of the hearing again. This entire hearing got so weird, I forgot about it. Sounds to me West is asking for the States analysis of the phone data. He is basicly saying ” we don’t know how to interpret the raw data”.

      • April 30, 2013 at 7:15 PM

        The defence not having a map doesn’t mean the prosecution doesn’t have one. If they do, it is work product they didn’t have to give to the defence. Defence got the raw data,let them pay for their own expert to make a map of it.

        I used to have a phone which showed the tower it was connected to. I could leave it on a table, untouched, and watch as the tower name kept changing. One was rare, the other two kept coming up but changing around frequently. So it’s the towers changing traffic load, no need for the phone itself to be moved at all. The signal will be moved from one tower to another in the middle of a call, too, one of the major reasons for call drop-outs.

        But this is all cell tower pings. GPS data is from satellites and would show the same location regardless of which nearby tower the phone signals were using. But now we really don’t know if they have any, for either phone.(sob).

        • April 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM

          I’m pretty sure what the defense lacks is a clue. But GPS data is not hard to interpret, nor would it take a long time for a consultant to draw a map based on such data.

          My point is that if all they had to complain about was some bullshit regarding a cell tower routing traffic, then whatever data they have is not going to be exculpatory, be it GPS or not.

        • April 30, 2013 at 8:28 PM

          “Defence got the raw data,let them pay for their own expert to make a map of it.”
          That make sense. Thanks

          I was multitasking so, my initial question may have not been clear enough. Is there any indication that GPS information has been extracted from GZ’s phone?

        • April 30, 2013 at 9:43 PM

          As far as what I learned listening to 85% of the hearing today and following several live blogs of the event, nothing was disclosed about the possibility of any sort of location tracking regarding GZ’s cell phone. Neither the defense nor the prosecution mentioned anything specific regarding data from GZ’s phone.

        • amsterdam1234
          April 30, 2013 at 9:48 PM

          I don’t think there is any information available about whether gps data was extracted from GZ’s phone or not. We just don’t know if that data exists.

  15. unitron
    May 1, 2013 at 12:21 AM

    Full length video of today’s hearing, including the audio problems they had at the beginning, but apparently no “added commentary”.

    Here

    • May 1, 2013 at 4:16 AM

      Thanks Unitron.

      I’m not expert in trials but here is my take:
      Defense is preparing the mind of Jury members as the trial nears.

      How? Three points:
      1) Be offensive to build momentum. This is the main reason for the complaint about evidences not being given on time by the state.
      2) Damage DeeDee. I agree that she made a huge mistake. But it looks like it goes beyond her admitted lies. The defense is suggesting that she has been coached.
      3) Damage Trayvon and imply that he really was up to no good. There is no evidence that he was doing anything wrong. However, if he looses DeeDee’s testimony, then the time it took him to walk back from the 7-11 is an open question. This is where TM’s cell phone pinging a remote tower comes into play.

      #####

      About cellphone being bounced, you can make that little experiment yourself using the app “antenna” or any other of your choice. Tonight, from my family room, my cell phone has connected to 3 different towers miles apart within 15 minutes.

      I also read about a criminal case in California, in 2005 I believe, where the defendant was tracked using cell phone pings to towers. But, the defense was not aware of technical details at ATT that made it look like the guy was at Maui i.s.o. the BAy Area. From what I understood reading quickly to the explanation, at ATT, if your call is bounced to a voicemail, it may be recorded as coming from the receiver’s cellphone. Don’t ask me why it;s like that. So, the message is to not rush to conclusions when it comes to that technology.

      The other conclusion is that there was no gps coordinate stored in the phone. They would have used them instead.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 1, 2013 at 8:12 AM

        We don’t know what kind of data was on that phone. I listened to the part of the hearing dealing with the phone again. Defense received all the raw data and they indicated they were unable to read the data. They will have to spend money on an expert to get the data in an understandable form.

        I believe FDLE and FBI reports are part of discovery, but work done by other experts are part of the states workproduct and are not part of discovery.

        • May 1, 2013 at 8:33 AM

          Amsterdam- why do you seem so hopeful/ certain that GPS data will be found/ useful on TMs phone?

          We know trayvon went to the 7Eleven and we know that GZ told NEN that Trayvon was “near the clubhouse now” and wherever else he might have been in between he was on the phone w dee dee. What sort of mud or reasonable doubt can come from this?

        • amsterdam1234
          May 1, 2013 at 9:21 AM

          I am not certain that there is gps data, other than defense team had said that there was. I am disagreeing with the fact they were talking about the cell tower, is proof that there isn’t. The fact is we don’t know what was recovered from Trayvon’s phone, and apparently neither does the defense. So let’s stay with the facts.
          The fact that the defense doesn’t know what is on that telephone is relevant, not just because of the gps data but what it says about the defense’s case 40 days before the trial begins.

      • May 1, 2013 at 8:20 AM

        II agree that the fact that MOM chose to mention cell tower pings tends to mean there was no usable GPS information found on trayvon’s cell phone. I also agree that what he has to throw at Trayvon’s and at DeeDee is weak. He’s got nothing else to throw however so he plans on slinging this mud at trial hoping to sow doubt into the minds of the jurors.

        I hope the prosecution prevents the “long tail” scenario at trial. I think GZs lies about where he stopped his car will sink him If presented carefully. Without using dee dee I feel a strong case can be made to show that GZs lies to SPD have ONE organizing principal, and that is to omit and obfuscate the car to pedestrian chase.

        • May 1, 2013 at 8:24 AM

          Prevents = presents
          Typo

        • May 1, 2013 at 9:57 AM

          Speaking of the long tail. In the past week, I’ve emailed FOX35 to asking them the contact information of the person who shot the aerial footage on the night of TM’s killing. My hope is to find GZ’s truck on TTL. I’ve got no success so far. If you have better means, don’t hesitate contacting them.

          It appears to me that the number of images of the RATL we got from them on Feb 26th 2012 is very limited and those footages been selected to show police on the crime scene. I cannot believe they flew the helicopter just for those few brief footages of police cars on RVC. I suspect more has been filmed and that possibly some images of TTL minutes or hoours after the shooting exist.

    • May 1, 2013 at 4:10 PM

      Precious.

  16. May 1, 2013 at 2:58 PM

    Regarding the helicopter footage of the crime scene – I’ve wondered about that as well. My question is, what time was the footage shot? It may have been as late as the ten o’clock news broadcast that evening if was carried live, but probably before then. The difficulty here is that the Honda Ridgeline presumably was moved before very much time had passed after the killing.

    And even that presumes the Ridgeline was ever there in the first place. The pool video might be our best view of the vehicle that GZ was in. I’m not prepared to say for certain that is a honda ridgeline – are you guys?

    I also wonder about ofc Tim Smith’s dash camera. Judging from the timing and speed of his travel, he cruises up by the clubhouse at a normal speed but hurries down to W-3’s house after hearing that gunfire is involved. If he switched on his flashers, maybe the camera comes on automatically then. Maybe it runs all the time. Who knows? What we do know is that NO patrol car dash cam videos have been entered into discovery yet.

    Which way was his car facing? Frank Taaffe said to a tv news reporter “according to George” that it faced the mail kiosk.

    Many questions, few complete answers.

    • unitron
      May 1, 2013 at 3:13 PM

      “The difficulty here is that the Honda Ridgeline presumably was moved before very much time had passed after the killing.”

      They ran the plate on it (silver honda, came back registered to “Zimmerman”) about an hour after Smith left to take Zimmerman to the cop shop, so it wasn’t moved, or moved very far, for at least that long.

      I am a little curious about when the chopper flew overhead, since air rescue didn’t come for Martin because of weather.

      But I don’t know exactly when the weather was doing what that night.

      • May 1, 2013 at 4:02 PM

        That’s a decent clue as to when it may have been moved. If it was there on TTL where GZ claims it was (never mind which way it may have been facing) at the time someone noted the plate numbers, and then the plates were “ran” to see who they belonged to, that was of course the golden opportunity for the police to THEN go check the vehicle to see if it was related to the crime scene. PERHAPS they did go back at that point to check it out, and found it had been moved at that point.

        As for the cancellation of a medivac helicopter, I’d not heard that. The fact that he was dead when trained personnel arrived may have also factored into the decision.

        • unitron
          May 1, 2013 at 5:06 PM

          “The fact that he was dead…”

          Am I really going to have to quote from “The Princess Bride”?

          As to the truck, they were looking for vehicles that *did not* belong in the neighboorhood to try to identify the victim.

          Any notion that the truck location and orientation were potentially of any particular importance didn’t pop up until at least a couple or three days later after Zimmerman’s post shooting interviews were available to compare with the NEN call.

      • May 1, 2013 at 4:15 PM

        The ofc who ran his plate actually is a witness who may be able to testify, where the truck was and what direction was it facing. Wit 03 too had a look on TTL. She actually is the only one I know who must have seen it before anybody had a chance to move it. But would they remember?

        Ground journalists were in RATL early enough to catch on camera pictures of the ofc in charge of taping the crime scene. It suggests that journalists probably got a tip rather quickly.
        Orlando is big enough as a city to have the journalistic organizations that can act on this kind of events. The real questions are whether they got pictures of TTL or not, and whether there is a silver Honda Ridgeline on those pictures.

        I believe that the only way to know is to get to the journalists involved. I’m not successful so far, but if we are more numerous asking for the same question, they may smell the possible scoop and have a 2nd look to their material.

        • May 1, 2013 at 5:06 PM

          The videographer who caught a bit of the yellow tarp from between the buildings that face RVC also shot an angle towards W11’s ford truck. At that point, there was no Ridgeline where GZ claimed he left it.

          wide shot TMbody

          this is the shot I mean of the yellow tarp. He seems to have made another shot where his camera was panned to the right fmor around this same angle.

          I can’t recall the url of this original tv report. But If you have it, or know where it is remind me, too. This was shot at a time prior to the removal of the body, so whenever that was I’m saying the Ridgeline was for sure gone by then unless it was parked in a very different place than GZ claims.

  17. May 1, 2013 at 5:20 PM

    here is a similar fox 35 report that uses the same file footage. Note the shot at 0:40 and the one at 2.:02 that has TM’s head blocking what would be a view of TTL and the ford truck, i think…..

    In any case, yes, the footage shot that night by this cameraman MIGHT have something interesting on it, if we could look at the out-takes.

    I’ve often wondered who all the people gathered on the dog walk sidewalk are as well. I wonder if anyone caught Mark Osterman on camera at any point.

    • May 1, 2013 at 5:20 PM

      whoops here is the link

      • amsterdam1234
        May 2, 2013 at 9:11 AM

        I meant to ask you about the 40 sec shot. Is that the ford truck we are looking at here, and from what direction?

  18. May 1, 2013 at 8:43 PM

    BBC good work if you want to have an idea of how this is viewed overseas:

    There also is a part 2

    • amsterdam1234
      May 2, 2013 at 11:12 AM

      Thanks for the link. It was big news in the Netherlands. The gun culture, the vigilante as hero, the racisme, it is shocking for Western Europeans. The idea that you can carry a gun, shoot an unarmed teenager, claim self-defense, and go home. It is unimaginable to us.

  19. May 1, 2013 at 11:52 PM

    Thanks for the link to the BBC piece. That case in Pasedena, Texas is shocking. It’s a very well produced segment. If you haven’t already seen the animations of Mark Fiore, check them out. I was glad to see that the “beeb” used his work to explain ALEC.

    It does make me realize that the majority of people out there know he has a self-defense claim, but that most of these people don’t realize how inconsistent and contradictory his claims were.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 2, 2013 at 11:26 AM

      That pasadena case is horrifying. I guess that is what Serino would call a “good kill”.

      • May 2, 2013 at 12:09 PM

        Yes horrifying, but I find much more horrifying the decision of the Jury not to indict him.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 2, 2013 at 12:47 PM

          Yes, almost 4000 years after Hammurabi. I find it frightening.

  20. May 2, 2013 at 12:24 AM

    Another SYG case: McNeil vs State: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1418360.html

    OK, I have to make it clear that I don’t approve the killing of Epp in this case and can find some justification to the time served.
    That said, the contrast with the case in Pasadena, TX hurts my brain.

    • May 2, 2013 at 9:15 AM

      Yes, Pasadena TX hurts my brain too and my heart and my sense of humanity. Shocking and unconscionable the actions of the shooter Joe Horn and shocking and unconscionable the actions of the jury that failed to indict him. On the evidence of this call alone the jury should have been indicted themselves for accessory to murder 1 after the fact.

      The most harrowing 911 call I heard even more so than the 911 with the screams of this case as you aren’t so aware of what is going on and who is doing what until knowing more details on the case and listening attentively to it many times.

      In the case of Joe Horn that is a 100% PROVABLE PREMEDITATED MURDER 1. From the start of the call only prejudiced & evil thinking people would not realise exactly what Horn wants to do, plans to do, what he proclaims he is going to do, and what he finally does, i.e. shoot to kill both suspects… and even worse, in the back while running away. And the very worst of all of this is it shows that whatever and however much evidence there is proving without a reasonable doubt that that GZ murdered Trayvon there is a weakest link, i.e. the jury, when for justice to be real it should be the strongest.

      A serious study I found once shows that in the US 85% of trials are decided at the time of jury selection, making proof and evidence too often superfluous as it clearly was in the Horn case and why MOM & Co waived immunity/SYG etc. As LLMpapa often plays with, “you can’t fix stupid” and of course you can’t, but MOM & Co are absolutely not stupid, to the contrary they are very very acute, they know full well GZ’s only chance is via a Jury and I for one am very fearful they may well pull it off and I can’t say I will be surprised if they do

  21. May 2, 2013 at 9:20 AM

    @Tchoupi and anyone interested and who didn’t hear it yet the Joe Horn 911 over 8 min harrowing call proving premeditated murder 1 didn’t place so I am posting again here.

    • May 3, 2013 at 3:12 PM

      The victims were illegals with long conviction histories. So everyone thinks “good shoot, they deserved it”.

      Had they been cleanskin white teens, friends of the neighbours’ teens, climbing in to wait for their friend to come home………different story I bet.

      This guy announced his intention of killing these intruders — premeditated. Murder 1.

      • May 3, 2013 at 6:54 PM

        You bet white skins would have been different! But I bet he wouldn’t have shot white skins. The call leaves little doubt he was raring to go out and kill them and the Jury clearly felt the same. Disgusting!

  22. 2dogsonly
    May 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

    Big Difference in Horn and GZ, Trayvon was not robbing anyone, did not have burglary tools on him, was talking to his friend, NEN call. Yes, jury selection is paramount as seen in OJ trial but these cases are not comparable.

    It is what GZ so wanted to find when he was patting down Trayvon’s body , please god let him have a gun. Instead poor kid only had candy and drink.

  23. May 2, 2013 at 7:01 PM

    Welcome to AmeriKKKa where it’s open season on the poor. The Horn case is about as sad as it gets one would think but then you read about Trayvon Martin and his killer.

    I agree that Mark O’Mara is not stupid. He’s playing liar’s poker and winning at least part of the time. History books are written by the winning side.

    We’ll see soon enough if BDLR has what it takes to seat and convince a jury of M2. I think he’s up to it. I think GZ’s lies to the SPD will sink his case and that establishing a PATTERN of lies will be the key to getting a jury to convict.

  24. May 5, 2013 at 1:49 PM

    amsterdam1234 :
    I don’t think there is any information available about whether gps data was extracted from GZ’s phone or not. We just don’t know if that data exists.

    All we do know is that the capabilities of capturing and recording GZ gps data did exist at the time and that if it was captured it would have been military grade since 2000 and that a second system that could capture gps data from GZ’s phone existed in the NEN/911 call center since they both used the same E911 consoles. The NEN call line was by designation, not by separate system.

    We also know that Trayvon’s T-mobile had a gps enabled chip in 2012, by which time most carriers were selling ad services that depended on locating customers. Also phone locator apps as security devices were in wide use by 2012 and many stolen devices were being reported recovered by police, who were able to locate the device.

    Of course, even with all of this likelihood info, we still do not know for sure that any of it was deployed or working on any device involved.

    Because storage memory is so cheap, many service providers deploy systems with storage so large that it can take years before old data is overwritten. Thus, with little over a year of elapsed time, if Trayvon or GZ’s phone recorded gps data on the providers servers, that data would very likely still be there for the geeks to recover.

    • May 5, 2013 at 2:04 PM

      What we also know is that the State’s Attorney charged GZ with M2 before the investigators sent TM’s phone to a third part forensic examiner. If there is GPS or other data that helps locate the phone on the night of the killing, it wasn’t part of the reason they decided to charge M2.

      I’m slightly less certain about the chain of custody regarding GZ’s phone. He surrendered it to the SPD but got it back on the evening of the killings, then at some point the prosecution recovered text messages they’ve alluded to that seem to speak to his attitude about Al Sharpton or someone similar. When did this happen, and does the state still have his phone or not? We’ve not seen that his phone was sent to a third party forensic examiner that I recall. Am I wrong? What’s the whole story?

      Also we know that in this latest “yes sir, no pre-trial SYG” hearing that MOM tried to make a point about cell tower signals, not anything related to GPS. As fascinating as it would be to know “they went thataway” type info, I’m in the doubters camp. We don’t know now and we aren’t likely to ever know where the two persons went in the “missing minutes” even though one of them DOES know exactly where he went. We just know he’s lying, is all since his story is inconsistent, contradictory and often impossible to reconcile with the evidence.

      • unitron
        May 5, 2013 at 2:27 PM

        “I’m slightly less certain about the chain of custody regarding GZ’s phone. He surrendered it to the SPD but got it back on the evening of the killings…”

        Are you talking about when they brought it to him to look up the number of the guy from the property management firm to ask him about the front gate camera?

        Are you sure he got to keep it after that?

        • May 5, 2013 at 2:50 PM

          I don’t know if they let him keep it or not, but they let him go home that night, they called him the next day to meet up of the re-enectment (i think they called him) and later they have intimated that he sent some not so nice text messages. Perhaps he had a new phone by then but I tend to doubt it. Serino seemed to keep up with George and they had many later calls. I’m not sure George had the funds available to get a new cell phone until donations came in, at which time his wife bought them iPhones, but GZ was in jail by then.

          On what grounds would they have held the phone in his possession on the night of the killing?

          Letting him retrieve the HOA person’s number may have been part of the “good cop/ good cop” routine they ran on him, but the question becomes pertinent about custody of the phone if they ASKED him at any point “can we look at your phone?” and used that as the permission to remove his SIM chip and make a digital copy of the whole thing. I tend to doubt that this happened at the time of the initial interviews by SPD.

          However it may have happened on the occasion of his arrest by the State. I don’t know. I do wonder on what grounds the state examined his phone if they have, and where and under what circumstances they recovered text messages that they mentioned in a hearing.

      • May 6, 2013 at 10:37 AM

        Yep, we’ve got knowledge of the capabilities of the technology, before, during and after, yet we have no way to know if any of it was deployed or if such data is available. Although I strongly suspect, from my readings, that it was. We still can’t know if the players have captured that data and/or are using it to make their case.

        So we’ll just have to keep guessing, but my guess is, this lack of knowledge certain should be of no comfort to the defense.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 5, 2013 at 2:41 PM

      I am fascinated about the gps data. Not just to find out what happened that evening, but to see who is collecting what data. For example these locator apps. Who collects that data? When I heard that they found gps data for Trayvon’s phone, I assumed they must have gotten it from the phone itself, because they must have had data from provider long before they could access the phone’s memory. But is gps data used with certain apps, stored with the provider or is it stored on the servers of the app provider? In that last case you would need access to the phone, to find out which apps were running on that phone in order to find where gps data for that phone is stored.

      It is frightening to see how little privacy we have, it is also interesting to think what good things could be possible. It must be possible to reverse engineer who was at the same location at the same time, in cases of stranger abduction.

      • May 5, 2013 at 3:04 PM

        We live in a surveillance state. The satirical weekly THE ONION ran a headline that said CIA ANNOUNCES TOTAL SUCESS WITH OPERATION FACEBOOK that made me laugh. We are all tracking ourselves for Big Brother and posting our faces and likes and friends names voluntarily in many cases with out online lives, and MASSIVE amounts of other data is mined from how we surf and browse the net, even before we start shopping and banking.

        TM could have been running a music app like Pandora or Spotify that was generating some sort of data that could locate him, we just don’t know. I do know that on my iPhone, many apps ask on launch “can (name of app) use your current location?” or some such. What becomes of this data if you say yes? It’s stored, used and traded and sold would be the obvious conclusion to draw. I don’t know the details but why have it and not use it?

        • unitron
          May 5, 2013 at 3:11 PM

          Back in January of 2001 The Onion ran an article about the upcoming first inagural of G.W. Bush, entitled “Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over”.

          It might have been funny at the time, but when I became aware of it and read it a few years later it was chillingly prophetic.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 5, 2013 at 3:21 PM

          You know they will use the information. That is why I am really curious to hear what they have in gps data. The defense seems to operate on a shoestring. It was obvious they hadn’t hired a digital forensic expert yet.

          I am really in a fog as to what the SPD could take in to custody that night. They took buccal swaps, but no blood or fingernail scrapings from GZ. They took his shoes and socks, but they don’t mention his phone or other items he may have carried in his pockets.

      • May 6, 2013 at 11:19 AM

        Yes. Once Clinton allowed civilian use of military gps, many applications that used gps were developed. Some of them were of use to cell phone service providers, since it allowed them to offer features for pay, to increase revenue. Once mfg’s saw that phone providers were using gps, they created on board chips to provide the service, meaning that no software need be written or kept updated. Simply send a request for service to the gps chip and get back your location data. Then app writers took advantage of this, they no longer needed to write gps programs, but only programs that used the data returned from the service call to the gps chip.

        Where this data goes is another matter. My guess is that the app providers have servers to store this data, and since it travels over the digital net work, it lands on ultra large servers where it won’t be overwritten for months and probably years. Each app may have it’s own servers, or they may use google’s servers (in which case the record is permanent, google keeps every zero and one that crosses it’s network forever). Stores, advertisers may also store data and, of course your own cell service provider may either capture your gps location directly and store it, or capture it from one of the apps you’re running and keep that.
        And as usually there’s the dark side and the gray area entities who may invade and capture, either legally or by unfriendly methods.

        We just saw where the “unfriend app” designed to let you know when someone unfriended you on facebook, also added “inject search” to your google search page, which took over your searches and often directed you to worthless ad pages instead of the results you were seeking. Such is the digital world of today.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 6, 2013 at 1:55 PM

          I would assume Google will have and keep gps data. Talk about targeted ads. Using gps they can push ads of businesses located on the street you are on. Latest gps chips are so accurate, they’d probably can register if you visit that business.
          We’ll find out during the trial.

          Do you have an opinion about recoverable gps data from GZ’s car?

        • May 6, 2013 at 5:59 PM

          The last I’ve read about vehicle gps data was quite some time ago (when Wagoner was CEO of GM) they said at the time that vehicles would store the last 30 seconds of operational data to help analyze crashes. Could very well be they’ve expanded on that since then. After all, when you buy or lease a vehicle you get to accept a EULA that’s at least three months reading at a legal practitioners level, so who knows what you’re allowing them to do? :lol; They might even have a right to take your first born, you’d never know until they asked.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 8, 2013 at 10:41 AM

      You learn something new everyday. Thanks for mentioning E911 system, never heard of it before. I did some checking to see if a nen call would trigger location information to be send. I found out that the ALI entry on the event reports indicates that location information has been transmitted. I checked the GZ’s call logs. The nen calls don’t have Ani/Ali information. The 911 calls do. So I guess that eliminates that as a possible capture point.

      • May 9, 2013 at 10:11 AM

        I wouldn’t be so sure, because the NEN calls and the 911 calls are done on the same system, it’s just that the terminals designated for NEN duty probably had the locators turned off. After all, you wouldn’t need to locate someone calling about a non-emergency. But, if I know anything about systems and software, just because a function is turned off, doesn’t mean that it actually is off. It just means that the results of the services aren’t being displayed.

        It’s like when you erase a file on your computer. You hit delete and the file disappears. Only it isn’t gone, all that has happened is, it’s gone from the file list. On the disk the first character of the file name has been set to underscore and the space on the file allocation tables marked as free. But the file is still there and depending on how big your disk is and how heavy your use, the file might be there for months before being overwritten.

        GPS services are usually performed by a chip designed to provide such service. When they shut off service on the console, they’re probably not shutting down the service at the chip level, all they’re doing is preventing it’s data from being displayed. As a programmer, I’d say it’s far easier to just ignore unwanted data than stop it from being generated and stored. So if someone wanted that feature, so they could switch consoles from NEN to 911, I’d probably write out the display and leave everything else alone. Hee hee hee. but hey, you have no idea how much code it takes to do things fully. The problem is, every thing you do in code has to also have protections written in so that errors get caught and corrected. So a small request can result in huge volume of code being needed.

        Thus the data may be right there on the disk, just that it’s not being displayed. I doubt the SP will seek to have a systems analyst pursue the matter, so you’re probably right, we’re simply not going to get it from that quarter. We’ll have to hope that T-mobile has it. He was using a cheap prepaid scheme phone, so gps was probably on by default, since providers tend to abuse their cheapest customers. Less privacy and more of your data gets collected and resold.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 9, 2013 at 2:54 PM

          I hope so Lonnie, but what I read about the system it sounds like the provider is responsible for supplying information and directing the call depending on the location, to the right psap when 911 or 311 is called. When the direct long number of the psap is called, it doesn’t give the information.
          http://www.911dispatch.com/911/911glossary.html
          I don’t believe GZ used 311. He mentioned another direct non emergency number.

          By the way, I am also a systems analyst/programmer. It is a lot of fun reading about these systems.

        • May 10, 2013 at 10:40 AM

          I sort of gathered that you might be systems litterate.

          Anyway I was checking the header of the call reports when I saw fields that it would be unlikely for the operator to fill out. For example a box labeled “nearest intersection”. I sincerely doubt, that of all the other boxes of apparent higher priority that get left unfilled, an operator would know off hand the nearest intersection of an incomming call.

          Yet, there on GZ’s NeN call sheet is “nearest intersection” filled in with Long Oak Way. Obviously there’s some sort of system locator software at work, wouldn’t you say?
          From GZ’s story RVC should be the closer intersection, because he supposedly started this NeN call while he was at either the clubhouse or near the mail kiosk. So, why is the operater even bothering with filling out the nearest intersection field? Even if he knew the area, why would he guess?

          As a systems analyst I’m sure you can see my point?

        • amsterdam1234
          May 10, 2013 at 10:59 AM

          I see your point. Page 6 of the 9/19 discovery are the event details that go with GZ’s event report. I think the system recognizes his telephone number and pulls up his history and that includes his own address which gives that intersection as the nearest intersection. That’s my best guess for why it gives that specific information.

        • May 11, 2013 at 1:06 PM

          I’ll agree that that seems plausible, to me it hardly seems likely. GZ’s phone is T-mobile on a pre paid scheme. One gives out their address to get the phone, they’d hardly give out the nearest intersection. Which means that the NEN system had to locate the nearest intersection itself, right? That’s both smart and incredibly dumb for a system handling cell phone data. To have the system do a dynamic analysis of static information isn’t really helpful.
          After all, the cell phone could be anywhere, so giving the phone owners address doesn’t mean much and it means even less to pull up the nearest intersection to an address that’s in all likelihood misleading as well.

          That would be a dangerous glitch in the system. So, I think it’s more likely that that data is dynamically obtained rather than static data just being posted to have something to post. Not that there’s no “nearest intersection” data for land lines? That’s where what you’ve suggested would make the most sense, but it isn’t there.

        • May 11, 2013 at 2:47 AM

          A lot of the calls had nearest intersection on them. They also had serial numbers with a telco name, which would be the cell tower the call was coming in from. Maybe triangulated from the towers. That would be data embedded in the call, no gps needed.

          Even if this data does come in from gps, it got recorded onto the form when the call was picked up, so would not be constantly updating if the caller is on the move.

          In Cleveland, did Charles Ramsey and Amanda Barry call 911 from landlines? or from cell phones? in both cases the dispatcher argued with them about where they were calling from, insisting they were at a different address than the one they gave. So they do have phone locations mapped very accurately.

          Incidentally, they need to THINK instead of reading off the script. Someone asks to be rescued because the kidnapper has gone out, what’s the urgency of “is he white black or Hispanic?” and “what was he wearing?”

        • unitron
          May 11, 2013 at 3:41 AM

          “…what’s the urgency of “is he white black or Hispanic?” and “what was he wearing?” ”

          So the responding officers know what he looks like in advance in case he comes back and maybe pulls out a gun?

        • May 11, 2013 at 4:03 PM

          Over the last few years on the news they’ve been making a big deal of recovering phones, within hours of them being reported stolen, using locator software. gps and apps and the like. We can keep guessing but I don’t think we’re going to figure out what they were able to do until they release the data.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 11, 2013 at 7:47 AM

          @ Aussie
          Lonnie made me aware of the E911 system, for which the FCC placed a lot of strict requirements on the providers. Here is a faq from Verison which as far as I can see, describes the situation in 2005, 2006.
          http://support.verizonwireless.com/faqs/Wireless%20Issues/faq_e911_compliance.html

          The E911 capabilities are build right into the handset, and is triggered when 911( and I believe 311) is dialed. US providers don’t accept mobiles without GPS chip on their network since around 2005. So GZ’s phone did have a GPS chip. If GPS is turned off and 911 is dialed, gps is automaticly turned on.

          Lonnie is right that the psap that responded to GZ’S nen call is E911 ready and that GZ’s phone is E911 compliant. I think GZ called the direct 7 digit number to the psap, which doesn’t appear to have triggered the E911 system on GZ’s phone.

        • May 12, 2013 at 7:27 AM

          Thanks and good work. Of course, anyone who works with computers knows that not the end of it, since even the computers we’re using right now are doing things in the background, and even some things we’ve opted to shut down may still be running, just not reporting.

          In any event I think that they will have gps data from gz’s phone, we already know they have it from Trayvon’s phone and they’re both T-mobile devices. So we’ll just have to wait and see.

        • May 12, 2013 at 4:35 PM

          I’m not sure but the form with the filled in “nearest intersection” as Long Oak Way, probably isn’t the result of the computer posting the known address of the cell phones owner, because if it was, then the location would not be TTL, with LOW as the nearest intersection. It would be RVC with LOW as the nearest intersection.

          So, clearly some locating device was at work.

        • May 12, 2013 at 7:45 AM

          Of course this is also old data, and it seems from all the searches being done, and what little is being returned, as systems were upgraded and accuracy was improved over time, little to nothing about the current status has been released.

        • May 12, 2013 at 7:51 AM
        • amsterdam1234
          May 11, 2013 at 1:15 PM

          @lonnie,
          Maybe it recognized the name. The Event detail report also shows previous calls made by the caller. I think it is more likely the system added the nearest intersection automaticly after Sean entered the address or it forces the dispatcher to pick one from a list.

          Sean took another call that evening. Austin’s sister. That call also has the indication tel instead of 911. It also doesn’t have Ani/Ali information.

        • May 12, 2013 at 9:43 AM

          Okay, but does it have “nearest intersection”?

        • May 12, 2013 at 5:11 PM

          Sean would not have entered the address or even selected it from a list on the NEN call, because if he did that, the call would have originated on RVC with LOW as the nearest intersection.

          Instead here’s GZ making a cell call to NEN and the call center is listing it as coming from TTL with LOW as the nearest intersection. Clearly that gps at work. Because if not, the header should say RVC with LOW as the nearest intersection because GZ lives on RVC and his phone is connected to that address.

  25. May 7, 2013 at 1:31 PM

    Here is a photo I’ve not seen that shows some of how the grounds are slightly hilly inside the RATL. This is from a flickr set by nomatternevermind.

    Twin Trees Ln., From Bend to Cut-Through, 2/4/13

    He’s posted quite a few pictures recently and he’s still active at TalkLeft, I guess. Lots of pictures concerning possible routes to and from the 7Eleven.

    In my opinion, nothing regarding the route from the 7Eleven is material to the case since the “action” doesn’t begin until GZ calls NEN and reports a suspicious person “by the clubhouse now.” If he’s criminally profiling, here is where proof exists that he is doing so. If he is pursuing with his vehicle, here is where the proof exists. Whatever happened before would be almost impossible to prove BARD, even if there were surveillance videos of a kid in a hoodie and a man in a Honda RIdgeline playing cat and mouse somewhere in between 7Eleven and the RATL.

    Getting back to the photo I’ve linked to – the relevance there comes in when we speculate about GZ’s car position and TM’s route from the mail kiosk to the cut thru path.

    GZ made seemingly contradictory claims about how he was passed by the teen while parked in the clubhouse parking lot. He also drew on a map for singleton a route that cuts thru the grass shown in this photo. But when you look at the photo, you have to wonder if a kid would bother climbing that slight hill or not. I think not.

  26. May 10, 2013 at 9:14 AM

    ABC news reporting on MOM’s request ot have the jury sequestered:

    “Defense attorney Mark O’Mara also asks that the jurors be allowed to inspect the gated community in Sanford, Fla., where Zimmerman fatally shot Martin during a confrontation last year.

    O’Mara says the field trip will allow jurors to determine the reliability of witnesses.”

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/zimmerman-trayvon-martin-jurors-sequestered-19146148#.UYzxM81IWKQ

    So one would assume he wants to lean on the fact that W6 was “right there” and “saw it all” and MMA, etc. I tihnk he’s got more to lose than to gain by bringing the jury to the location, but strategy wise he’s got to keep bluffing like he’s holding a good poker hand. He’s got aces over eights, however IMO.

    • wassointeresting
      May 10, 2013 at 1:41 PM

      The prosecution also wants to depose Shellie again. Interesting that they hit a snag during their first attempt to depose her, they said she asked for a break then clammed up, saying she has a pending perjury trial. The prosecution say they weren’t going to ask about that. So what is it that they’re so very interested in asking her about hmmmmmmmm????????
      http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-jury-20130509,0,3638854.story

      • May 10, 2013 at 1:44 PM

        They want to get her on the record saying where she was and when she moved the Ridgeline, I hope. I say this because that would mean they already knew the answer and wanted to watch her lie again.

        • May 11, 2013 at 2:57 AM

          They can ask about
          * was there a tip off to GZ (eg from Osterman)
          * where did she move the truck from and was there anything in it (eg alcohol).

          I don’t think they WANTED her on record at all. It suits the prosecution to NOT have her on record. By her taking the 5th before the questions were even asked, the defence has NO IDEA what she’d say, and GZ can be confident she’s not rolled on him.

          They offered her immunity from these unasked questions. That’s not to say she doesn’t already have a deal about the perjury case IF she talks in this one. But she can talk on the witness stand, without her evidence first being in a depositiion that HAS to be shown to the defence and thereby would give the whole game away to them.

          She’s not safe to talk while GZ is on the outside.

        • May 11, 2013 at 12:02 PM

          Assuming she had to take a break from her deposition to decide to clam up or not, I wonder if she is still living with her husband or not? I’m guessing she is, and they sent her to answer easy questions but told her to stop/ call in/ plead the fifth as soon as she heard something that related to trial strategy. But of course I’m speculating.

  27. amsterdam1234
    May 12, 2013 at 11:00 AM

    Lonnie Starr :
    Okay, but does it have “nearest intersection”?

    I guess you mean Austin’s sister’s call. Yes it does show a nearest intersection. Twin Trees Lane/Twin Trees Lane.

    • May 12, 2013 at 5:29 PM

      Okay, now check GZ’s NEN call and see that it list RVC with LOW as nearest intersection.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM

        I am sorry, I don’t understand what you are getting at. GZ’s nen call shows Twin Trees / Long Oak as the nearest intersection. I agree that shouldn’t be the nearest intersection if the address is 1111 RVC, but Twin Trees/Twin Trees as the nearest intersection from Austin’s home doesn’t make sense either.

        I can think of a number of reasons why this happens, but I really can’t say unless I can actually look how people are using the system.
        It could be a common programming or design error. The system is developed to give as much accurate information as possible. Looks to me it is designed to close the gap for location information created by mobile phones. It wouldn’t be the first system I looked at that doesn’t completely take care of exceptions.
        It may have been a concious decision. The Verison paper only referred to this instance as the solution for anonymous calls.
        Triggering mechanism for getting location information send to the receiving system, is punching in 911 or 311. You punch in those numbers, you don’t have a choice whether your location information is acquired and transmitted. You dial any other number, that doesn’t happen. 911 and 311 are numbers that will connect you to the nearest psap to your current location, no matter where you and your phone are in the US. Local direct numbers to a psap don’t need to know your current location. They are funneling direct calls through the same system without location information, which works fine except for some glitches. The receiver has no control over what is going to be send.

        I hope I am wrong because it would be great if GPS data would’ve been transmitted from GZ’s phone to the 911 system, but I don’t see how that could’ve happened.

        • May 12, 2013 at 6:58 PM

          If some one lives on RVC east, their nearest intersection is going to be TTL because TTL runs from the front gate to the east/rear gate. So for any one on RVC east, whether the north or south end, TTL is going to be their nearest intersection. So that is correct.

          However, I had noted that on GZ’s NEN call, the nearest intersection box showed Long Oak Way. However TTL has 2 nearest intersections. One is RVC if you are near the mailboxes, or if you are South of the mailboxes the nearest intersection is going to be LOW.

          Now someone suggested that the system might just have been picking up old data about the caller, whose home address would be registered to that phone.

          I said I don’t think that’s what it is, because if that were so, the NEN call would show RVC with the nearest intersection as LOW. But it shows TTL which is correct, and it shows LOW as the nearest intersection, when if GZ’s location was what he claimed, near the mail kiosk, the nearest intersection should have been RVC.

          Clearly the console was picking up gps locator data. Which was my original point. Perhaps, by the code display, it should not have been doing this, but that’s only going by the code display, that doesn’t mean that the system hasn’t been either altered or designed not to pay attention to code displays. Because gov’t always wants to convince you that they’re not tracking when they are, because they don’t want to stop tracking, but they do want to stop you from finding out that they are.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 12, 2013 at 7:39 PM

          @lonnie
          You are a programmer. You know you can think of a bunch of reasons that may cause this. I know I can and I also know I will probably miss the right one. I am not ready to assume a massive government conspiracy with providers and phone manufacturers before exhausting the more likely causes.

          Just think about the system. The handset has to put in a request to a satelite for a location. The receiver can’t do this. The software on the phone has to do it always or only when certain circumstances are met, such as the dialing of a specific number. Every number used by police, fire or medical would need to be tested and updated for non 911 and 311 numbers to also receive the gps data. Or every call you make would have to transmit your location information. There is nothing in between.

        • May 13, 2013 at 8:40 AM

          But that’s exactly what I’m saying. Working back from the end, the printout shows the call originated on TTL and the nearest intersection was LOW. The operator of the NEN console didn’t enter this info, this data was generated by the computer. The operator could only have guessed at it and he would not do that.

          So, if the NEN isn’t supposed to have gps, then how come the printout shows dynamic location data? Obvious simple answer? The system creators simplified and simply left gps active for all functions, both NEN and 911 consoles have gps and it can’t be turned off. So there’s one less feature for the system designers to churn out reams of code and do testing on. It’s way easier to give the customer a switch that toggles the report/not reporting code off and on, while actually doing nothing of the sort with the actual function.

          Worse that could happen is the customer has a 311 call turn into a 911 call and need gps data. In that case the customer would be happy to learn that gps was never disabled. Until then the code switch gives the customer the peace of mind insisted upon.

          I’ve listened to the NEN call, and I’ve determined that you probably couldn’t determine from the sounds that GZ was following Trayvon. You might get that he’d gotten out of his truck, but the other sounds could be anything. That made me think that perhaps, since Sean had handled these stupid calls from gz, out of curiosity he turned gps on early in the call. Thus, when gz started running Sean was watching it on screen, gz’s phone moving rapidly along. That prompted Sean to guess that gz was following and so he asked. That data is on one of the cd’s the SP turned over but O’Mara has no experts to decode it, nor does he want to even bother since, after talking to gz he must know that gz is lying and can’t be helped.

        • unitron
          May 12, 2013 at 9:51 PM

          “…but Twin Trees/Twin Trees as the nearest intersection from Austin’s home doesn’t make sense either.”

          Walk out the front of Austin’s house–the street is RVC. Turn south. The first intersection you come to is with TTL. If you turned north instead and started walking, you’d wind up turning west and the first intersection you’d come to is the one with TTL near the clubhouse and “mail thing”.

          In order to get to Long Oak via car from Austin’s house, you have to pass through one of those intersections.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 13, 2013 at 1:16 AM

          @unitron

          Oke, that makes sense. I thought it meant the intersection of the 2 streets.

          @lonnie
          GZ’s nen call shows Twin Trees Lane and Long Oak Way as the nearest intersection. I guess it would be clearer if the report would say intersections.
          So the information is correct for 1111 RVC. Turn east the nearest intersection is TTL, turn west and it is LOW.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 13, 2013 at 9:09 AM

          @lonnie

          First things first. Which document are you looking at, because the one I am looking at shows the 2 first intersecting streets from the 1111 Retreat View Circle address, just as all of the other event reports do. The moment Sean typed in that address, that information would be available.
          It shows Twin Trees Lane/ Long Oak Way.
          I don’t see anything pointing towards a dynamic location.

        • May 14, 2013 at 10:07 AM

          It shows Twin Trees Lane/ Long Oak Way.
          I don’t see anything pointing towards a dynamic location.

          That’s it… That information is dynamic! You see, you argued that
          when gz connected to the NEN console, that the “nearest intersection” data might have been picked up from earlier data known about the callers address, that was already in the data bank.

          I said that would not be the case because, if it was simply old stored data, it would show RVC with nearest intersection as LOW. Because that’s where gz lived.

          This data is dynamic because it is not data that’s stored anywhere. Since the operator isn’t entering it, because they don’t know or guess at it. the system has to be picking this up and displaying it. It has, therefore, located a cell phone call, originating on TTL with the nearest intersection being Long Oaks Way.

          Remember a screen print or any print out is going to be static and only show data in the bank at the time of printing. My guess is, if you had been watching the monitor like Sean, you’d have seen data changing as gz got out of his truck and ran.

          Obviously, the only way the system could capture the data that the phone was on TTL near Long Oaks Way is if the system had locator software working. Otherwise this data would not be available at all.

        • May 13, 2013 at 9:15 AM

          Giving two “nearest intersections” also makes a huge amount of sense for longer streets…. it means “between X and Y” . Just saying “”X” would leave open the question of “which way from here? left or right?”

          Also GPS signals are co-ordinates which have to be overlaid on a map, and accuracy depends of how well that is done. Everyone’s heard of GPS systems that tell people to drive off cliffs or into rivers.

          Even if the data was not transmitted, it would still be on the phone. I do hope they got that phone in time and DID look for it.

        • unitron
          May 13, 2013 at 9:30 AM

          “Everyone’s heard of GPS systems that tell people to drive off cliffs or into rivers.”

          Yeah, but that’s only because they didn’t like those people. If they weren’t super accurate, how would they know exactly where those cliffs and rivers are so as to be able to send them there?

          : – )

        • May 14, 2013 at 10:17 AM

          Right, and for anyone who doubts how accurate gps could have been, consider Garmin GPS and other systems like it.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 13, 2013 at 9:28 AM

          @aussie

          It is good to know GZ’s phone must have had a gps chip. I am hoping they made a complete copy of the phone on 2/26. It is possible GZ had an application running that sends coordinates to a server. My phone shows which services and applications are used by apps that I am downloading. I was surprised to see how many of them used locator.

          I think there is a good chance there is GPS data from GZ’s phone. Just not from his nen call.

  28. May 13, 2013 at 12:52 PM

    That was an interesting discussion about the location information found in the call logs.
    I have made a summary table and added it to my image bank: http://i.imgur.com/O7dybeEh.png

    While making the table, a few things came up to me:
    1) the ALI data does not point to the exact address of the caller. Actually none of the addresses are within RATL. However, there are 3 streets that came up each time: Lowe Av, Codisco Way & Rinehart Rd. They probably are the location of the cellphone towers. I would be a gambler, I would bet you that it is the kind of information MOM referred to when he talked about TM’s phone pings. Those are no real gps information giving location down to 10 meters.
    2) GZ is not the only one who called a NEN #. Apparently, W15 (S. Brown) also has a TEL in the call Source column. In both cases, the ALI column is left blanked. I conclude that ALI is the only location information collected from the phone and you need to be calling 911 to get it running.
    3) The Business/Subdivision input is clearly entered manually as RATL is given in different ways.
    4) The address is the information entered manually by dispatcher once he got it from the caller.
    5) The High/Low Cross Road seems to be computer generated and the source of the information must be the Address which is manually entered by dispatch.
    6) The event # is formatted as: year + day # in the year + call # in the day. The call # is not in the order of the call receive time but it is not entirely decoupled.

    • May 13, 2013 at 5:13 PM

      I found 2 of the 3 antennas:
      1) 1701 Lowe Ave (1175 ft from crime scene).
      Actually there are 6 antennas at this address all registered to the FCC:
      Marin Fettman owns 3 and the registrants are T-mobile & Voicestream Wireless Corp.
      Dan Menser owns the other 3 and the registrant is Voicestream Wireless Corp.
      2) 601 Codisco Way (5750 ft from the crime scene),
      owned by Spectrasite Communications LLC & Through American Towers LLC.
      I could not find any FCC registration and I stopped looking. I don’t know who they
      sell the connections to.

      I found 23 other antennas and the Sanford area and the one on Rinehart is nowhere to be find. MaryW05 may have used a landline phone. I was just curious to see which ones TM’s phone connected to.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 13, 2013 at 6:35 PM

        Nice work Tchoupi. It is kind interesting, isn’t it? I tend to get sucked in once I start thinking about it. I just have to know how it works.
        I just finished reading this basic reference paper called “Wireless 911 for Telecommunicators”. I think you may find it helpfull.
        https://www.nc911.nc.gov/pdf/A_TelecommunicatorReference.pdf

  29. amsterdam1234
    May 14, 2013 at 8:25 AM

    Whatsup Whonoze?
    Everything allright?

    • May 15, 2013 at 11:10 AM

      I just got to CA after driving my last load of stuff cross-country from CT via U-Haul. Four days in a truck only getting out to pump gas into the tank and pump urine out of my bladder. Traumatic, but i survived.

      Anything happen in the case?

      • unitron
        May 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM

        “…only getting out to pump gas into the tank and pump urine out of my bladder. ”

        As long as you didn’t get it the other way ’round, it’s all good.

        : – )

      • amsterdam1234
        May 15, 2013 at 12:54 PM

        It sounds exhausting. You must be glad it was the last one.

        A lot of pretrial motions by the state, but the big buzz are the reports by audio experts for the State. They also got some audio samples from Trayvon.

        It is good to see you again.

        • May 16, 2013 at 8:50 AM
        • unitron
          May 16, 2013 at 10:03 AM

          “An interesting take on the trial”

          Unfortunately, interesting does not always mean completely accurate.

          1. Zimmerman can’t claim self-defense when He provoked the situation. And self-defense is only allowable against an UNLAWFUL attack.

          Florida law actually does allow certain circumstances where the originator of the conflict can claim self-defense.

          Although since one witness says Martin initiated physical contact and the other heard what could have been either of the two pushing or shoving the other, or both doing so simultaneously (or it could have been something else that made a similar sound), but as she was only hearing it over the phone and not seeing it, we can’t be sure from her account who first made physical contact with whom.

          2. Zimmerman confronted Martin after following him. He had no authority to stop Martin on a public street and demand to know what he (Martin) was doing.

          Both alleged witnesses, Zimmerman and Witness 8, say Martin spoke first.

          Neither Martin nor Zimmerman broke any laws by asking each other questions, and neither would have been legally obligated to answer the other.

          Both were within their rights to be where they were and would have been within their rights to have not stayed there.

          What we’ve heard from Witness 8 so far does not indicate that Zimmerman physically “stopped” Martin prior to them exchanging words.

          If, prior to or during the exchange of words, Martin felt endangered, he could easily have eluded Zimmerman on foot.

          If Zimmerman’s gun was already out in his hand, it’s more likely than not that Martin would have said something other that just “What are following me for?”.

          3. Zimmerman was carrying a weapon. The neighborhood watch program prohibits persons who are “on duty” from possessing weapons.

          There is no one monolithic nationwide neighborhood watch program, the edicts of which an individual neighborhood has any obligation to observe.

          Further, Zimmerman was not “on duty” at the time anyway, and there is nothing that obligates a person who is both a licensed concealed carrier and a neighborhood watch volunteer to ignore anything they happen to notice when not “on duty” just because they have their firearm with them.

          4. At no time has Zimmerman asserted that Martin was or had been engaging in anything illegal. (Defending himself against a man with a gun is not illegal).

          Zimmerman didn’t specify any actual criminal conduct, just suspicious, on Martin’s part, until the part where he says Martin hit him.

          If it happened the way Zimmerman claims, that part would have been illegal.

      • ada4750
        May 16, 2013 at 11:49 AM

        @unitron The common sens in a case like reported by DeeDee points GZ as the originator, no matter who spoke or even struck first.

        If you think that Florida law does not allow this interpretation, can you be more specific.

        • unitron
          May 16, 2013 at 11:58 AM

          By originator, do you mean the person who first laid hands upon the other person?

        • May 16, 2013 at 1:30 PM

          Com’on Unit you have just gotten here yesterday! You know very well that the person out of line is the person who caused the other person to fear for their own safety first.

          gz had been sighted by Trayvon as following him. That caused Trayvon to become concerned for his safety such that he could no longer continue to walk home in the relaxed and carefree manner he had so far enjoyed. At that point gz was committing a crime, a misdemeanor, but sense he was armed that upped it to a felony. His pleas of ignorance of the law do not withstand or buy him jack! He was interfering with and constraining the activities of another person by causing fear. He had been instructed not to do this, but he chose to do it anyway. He failed to end the hostilities at his first opportunity, so he continued hostilities and escalated them by getting out of his truck to follow on foot.

          The law was being broken by foggen before any confrontation happened and thus gz, as an armed person, had no right to self defense and should have withdrawn before any encounter could have happened.

          The law, controlling confrontations under these circumstances say that the courts recognize that a person in Trayvon’s position had the right to take gz’s weapon away, and still gz would have no right to claim self defense if he did. You already know this because we’ve been over it several times when you were on FL’s law blog and he posted the law and we discussed it at length.

        • ada4750
          May 16, 2013 at 12:01 PM

          The originator of the conflict as you wrote in your previous comment.

        • unitron
          May 17, 2013 at 8:50 PM

          ada4750 :
          @unitron The common sens in a case like reported by DeeDee points GZ as the originator, no matter who spoke or even struck first.
          If you think that Florida law does not allow this interpretation, can you be more specific.

          Tell you what, why don’t you post the Florida law that makes being an “originator” a crime.

          Bonus points for finding the Florida law that defines “originator”.

          If you mean “the aggressor”, that “…no matter who spoke or even struck first…” part is going to be problematic, because the only way Martin gets to strike first and still be legally in the right is if Zimmerman acts in such a way that a reasonable person would be convinced that he (Zimmerman) was within a fraction of a second of striking first himself.

          The sound W8 interprets as Trayvon being shoved could just as easily be the sound of Trayvon doing the shoving, but without anyone there to see (and not just hear) the shoving, and the moments just before, we don’t know who, if anyone, shoved whom, or what led up to it and whether the law in Florida would consider it an act of aggression or an act of self-defense in response to a reasonable perception of imminent danger from the other person.

          As for the part where the initial aggressor can still claim self-defense:

          Florida 776 Justifiable Use of Force

          776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—…a person is justified in the use of deadly force …if:
          (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself…

          776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

          (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
          (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
          (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

          Ellipses indicate where I ommitted material not pertinent to the point I’m making and I slapped the “bold” tags around the word unless myself.

        • ada4750
          May 18, 2013 at 8:41 PM

          Hi unitron. I used the word originator because that’s the one you used May 16, 10:03.AM, comment #143 (for now)

          Let’s the common sens talk. If GZ acted the way DeeDee reported then Trayvon may have been legitimate to struck first. It can be call self-defense ot even stand your ground. Therefore, GZ was the originator or aggressor if you prefer.

          You are right, even an aggressor can claimed self-defense. But according to many, including me, his injuries were not enough serious,

          These two point are the reason i wrote that a guilty verdict (manslaughter or M2) can be reduced to “who reached who”

          PS I wrote that before the voice study disclosed this week. Of course, if it is proven that Trayvon was the one screaming just before the gun shot then GZ is roasted.

        • unitron
          May 18, 2013 at 9:43 PM

          “…But according to many, including me, his injuries were not enough serious…”

          Leaving aside whether your medical degree includes diagnosis via telepathy, it doesn’t matter whether the person claiming self-defense is greatly injured, slightly injured, or injured not at all.

          What matters is whether the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent (i.e., about to happen in the very next moment if they don’t do something to prevent it first) danger of death or great bodily harm.

        • ada4750
          May 19, 2013 at 1:34 AM

          @unitron If the version of DeeDee is accepted and If GZ injuries are not serious enough then the burden of proof to prove an imminent serious threat relies on the defense. Am i wrong?

          ——————–

          You’ve been quite busy on an other blog. A suggestion had been raised. DeeDee is maybe an illegal immigrant (maybe from Haiti). That makes sens and would explain her very strange behavior.

        • unitron
          May 19, 2013 at 1:56 AM

          “You’ve been quite busy on an other blog. ”

          Oh, goodie, I’ve got a stalker now.

          “A suggestion had been raised. DeeDee is maybe an illegal immigrant (maybe from Haiti).”

          “sundance says:
          May 18, 2013 at 6:32 pm

          No. I am “not sure” of her immigration status – The vast majority of people from the country of origin are NOT illegal.

          However, I am reasonably certain (not positive – but 80% sure) she is not a naturalized citizen.”

          Sounds to me more like he thinks she’s here legally on a green card or something like that.

        • ada4750
          May 19, 2013 at 6:04 AM

          @unitron I like to read different opinions and even more conflicting views on a site of differing views to mine.

          I tried to write once there. Never published. Wonder why? Maybe because i mentioned the word racists.

      • May 16, 2013 at 6:43 PM

        What was traumatic? Emptying your bladder?
        Sorry but after reading from Unitron, I don’t know up from down anymore.

        • May 17, 2013 at 1:57 AM

          What was traumatic was emptying my old house of all the crap I had accumulated in 13 years. I realized how truly insane my life had become.

          And already sleep deprived from round the clock packing and trashing, I then drove over 3000 miles in less than four days, not having time to do sane things like stop for the night and get a motel room. Perhaps a European can’t really understand just how far California is from Connecticut or just how frighteningly empty Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah and Nevada are.

  30. ada4750
    May 14, 2013 at 9:25 AM

    I was watching this case at distance for a while. I read some of Mr Leatherman chronicles.
    May 3, 2013, he wrote “Notice that I did not mention Dee Dee (W8). I intentionally did not mention her because I have never believed she was a necessary witness, much less the prosecution’s star witness, as the defense and the media have described her.”

    This is amazing. DeeDee is the only direct witness who unambiguously contradicts GZ. Also, GS’s culpability (at some degree) is almost perfectly correlated to the statement that he tracked Trayvon until he finally reached him. In jury’s mind this statement will be closely related to DeeDee’s testimony.

    When Mr Leatherman says that DeeDee is not necessary, i think he means to get a guilty verdict without any mention of DeeDee. Like if she never existed. But the absence of DeeDee and the jury believing that her testimony is a fraud are two very very different issues.

    WITH THE PROOF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE and without any mention of DeeDee it is possible, although quite difficult, to obtain a guilty verdict. But DeeDee exists. The trial can’t ignore her and if the jury, for whatever reason, thinks that she is a fraud then by no way will he find GZ guilty, no matter his lies.

    For this reason, i pretend that DeeDee’s testimony is necessary to get a guilty verdict. Her testimony is also sufficient to prove that GZ tracked and reached Trayvon. Therefore the expression “prosecution’s star witness” is fully justified.

    • unitron
      May 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM

      “WITH THE PROOF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE and without any mention of DeeDee it is possible, although quite difficult, to obtain a guilty verdict.”

      Without Witness 8’s story, what evidence do you see the state being able to present to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not fire in self-defense?

      • ada4750
        May 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM

        Hi unitron. You always have tough questions! I will answer you quickly because i am short of time.. Without any striking balistic proof showing that GZ was not under Trayvon and also if it impossible to certify who was screaming just before the gun shot, the question of self-defense can be reduce essentially to who reached the other one near the T.

        The only way then is to uses GZ’s lies or inaccurate statements to convince the jury that he is lying about how the confrontation started. This is difficult.

        • unitron
          May 14, 2013 at 10:25 AM

          “…the question of self-defense can be reduce essentially to who reached the other one near the T. ”

          Oh, yeah, the part for which there were only 2 eyewitnesses, only one of whom survives.

          Although I’d take issue with the notion that knowing who approached whom at the “T” is absolute proof of who first laid hands on whom.

          (Trayvon could have come up to George and confronted him verbally, only to have George grab his arm to hold him for the police, for one example.)

          And there are circumstances where a person can, under Florida’s Justifiable Use of Force law, legitimately claim self-defense even if they first initiated physical contact.

        • May 14, 2013 at 4:59 PM

          GZ claims many versions of how the confrontation started. Emerging from bushes being one that a jury is going to hear about AND they will be visiting the location so that’s going to be one thing that will seem “off” right there.

          More importantly there is the matter of the location of the body and GZs many many versions of having been sucker punched to the ground while returning “towards” his vehicle. Unless trayvon is Popeye the Sailor Man there isn’t any credible way to assume and initial punch moved George 40 feet south. And his tale of “stumbling” simply isn’t credible.

      • May 14, 2013 at 11:59 AM

        Hi Unitron,

        I’m no specialist in legal business, but since it is impossible for GZ to be by the T just walking back to his truck 2 full minutes after the NEN call ended as he claims he was, then I surely believe that there is enough to crush the only witness to his self-defense story that is GZ himself.

        Add to this that his story about looking for an address to give to dispatcher Sean is plain idiotic.

        Add to this that the NEN call + evidences on the ground (flashlights) + map with NEN timing shows that he exited his truck to chase the kid.

        Add to this that GZ’s narrative can’t fit the frame of the his NEN call + RATL’s map.

        Add again that his wounds are not compatible with the kind of life threatening life event he claims he went though: No defense wound + injuries have minor bleeding + all physicals were normal ~20min after gunshot.

        Finally add that GZ blames dispatcher Sean for his following of the kid and God himself for the overall sequence of events.

        Then you get the picture of someone’s trying to run away from the responsibilities of his own actions because he knows that was wrong.

        Ultimately, the only way for TM & GZ to be where they ended up fighting 2.5 minutes after the NEN call ended is that at least one went after for the other. Since, GZ’s narratives don’t include that simple fact & don’t fit with evidences & show his willingness to redirect blames to others, there is no doubt in my mind that he is guilty of murdering the kid.

        As a contrast and in spite of being poorly stated, DeeDee’s narrative includes the chase that can account for both men ending up near the T. That’s why she is an important witness.

      • May 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM

        I am sure you have probably seen it by now but my must your ears must be a buzz buzz buzzing having been topic of a few days over at the lounge.

        • May 14, 2013 at 12:46 PM

          Oooops, sorry for so many typos, repeats, and absence of punctuation… got distracted by the audio expert reports just released by the prosecution @ GZlegalcase. Bad news for GZ I think.

        • unitron
          May 14, 2013 at 8:27 PM

          Thank you for calling my attention to that.

          I’ve been taking a look at the actual columns whenever the professor posts something new, but when the first few comments make it seem that it’s just going to be a couple of hundred variations on “I hate Zimmerman” I don’t bother going any further, so I hadn’t seen all the energy expended on me there recently.

          Some of it is downright hilarious.

          For someone with 15 kids, my mom sure didn’t get many Mother’s Day cards, (and I sure could have used their help during my father’s final days) and they must have lived in a different house from the one in which I grew up, or I think I might have eventually noticed them.

          I do wish racerrodig would post a list of all of my other identities over at HuffPo so I can go see what I said, and what other avatars I’ve been using, having not known at the time that I was posting there under any identity other than unitron.

        • May 14, 2013 at 10:08 PM

          Nice to be of service.

          What a shame… so not one of 15 siblings with all the fun you could have had growing up? But to give PMom her due she did caveat her “psychoanalysis” with “absolutely no cred to back it up” and she had kind words too so not as irredeemable on her account as you are for some! The constant “he or she” made me laugh… simpler to use third person singular or take a plunge using intuition and clues gleaned from comments.

          I’m too busy of late to follow much more than FL’s post and with hardly any movement on the case it can be a lot of chat. Should perk up now with the release of audio experts’ reports which after studying them don’t look as promising for Bernie as I first thought so perhaps whonoze will give a professional view.

          Oooops…off topic… just broke on the BBC a US spy (alleged) working undercover at the US embassy has just been detained in Russia, wigs’n all!

  31. May 14, 2013 at 12:52 PM

    Deductive reasoning supports the idea that GZ first chased TM with his car on TTL, causing the teen to run off the roadway. GZs statements to SPD establish a PATTERN of probable lies that can be presented to a jury in combination with ANY circumstantial evidence to make a case that GZ presented a false narrative to SPD and lied to cover up the fact that he was already committing a crime when he exited his vehicle.

    The map he marked for Singleton showing his likely position of his car near the mail kiosk will be quite crucial IMO.

    GZs statements to SPD and his NEN call are key. George was SOMEWHERE when he said by the clubhouse now? / Yeah now he’s coming towards me. There’s only ONE possible explanation for that which makes all his inconsistent an contradictory statements make sense. He was chasing the kid w his car and he’s a liar.

    When in doubt George left it out. What he did he blamed on the kid. Many things are possible but what GZ claims happened is not possible.

  32. May 14, 2013 at 1:15 PM

    Looks like the state has delivered discovery to the defense regarding expert testimony on voice identification. Can anyone parse what the expert said? It’s Greek to me.

    FWIW I’ve always had a very neutral opinion on whose voice/s are heard on the 911 call. If George is “calling help” he’s calling for help with an illegal detaining of a person who was walking home innocently. If he isn’t calling for help then he’s lying. Either way he had zero business being south of the T, and his claim of “stumbling” is clearly a false one since he’s contradicting every other statement he made about being struck to the ground by an initial blow to the nose.

    • May 14, 2013 at 7:42 PM

      Whonoze probably is the best able to help us on this. What I got is that the two consulting firms have used very different approach.

      FCA (Harry Hollien & James Harnsberger) used a collection of short samples totaling 8sec out of W11’s 911 call. The collection of samples is mostly made of cries & yells + a couple of “help” or ” help me”. They compared the collection of yells to samples from GZ calls & TM’s cellphone (so TM’s cellphone stored useful data afterall). They tried matching various parameters (pitch, vowel, nasality, …). In the end, FCA is not claiming much matching. What they found is that the early two yells from their collection tend to match TM while the last two tend to match GZ.

      FAC (Alan Reich) seem to be doing a more in depth work trying to identify and isolate words and sentences. Then he tries to match some to of the words he isolated to GZ’s and TM’s. It is not clear to me how much subjectivity is behind that method. However, I like the work in the details over the large brush used by FCA. The issue is that the method is obviously slow. So, FAC’s report only gives one example of matching, the last word which is says is “stop” rather than “help”. He then claims that the voice sound characteristics of that word match that of TM’s voice as the pitch is higher. So, according to FAC, TM yelled the last word and it was “stop”.

      To sum that up, there is much more chances that TM is heard crying on W11’s 911 call recording than not. GZ may have cried too.
      In the end, if TM was crying then not only GZ lied again (what a surprise) when he stated that TM was not but, TM definitely was in distress.
      This is in the last interview with Serino & Singleton that GZ was asked what and how TM was “talking” to GZ.

    • wassointeresting
      May 14, 2013 at 9:21 PM

      Been away and not paying much attention, but popped my head in here, read OS article briefly and this caught my eye. “He also claimed Zimmerman can simultaneously be heard making “a seemingly religious proclamation, ‘These shall be.’ ” That comes about a second into the 911 audio, Reich reported.” WTF???? This makes the prosecution sound crazy!

      http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-voice-20130514,0,2122283.story

      • May 14, 2013 at 10:34 PM

        Yes, “Dear God…” and “These shall be…” could make the prosecution’s case look loopy, but perhaps even more so his conclusion:

        His speech is characterized by the low pitch and exaggerated pitch contour reminiscent of an evangelical preacher or carnival barker”

        Shame because without these it would have been much more promising. Perhaps the prosecution was forced to release the report under the rules of disclosure but are not planning to rely on it, and if they don’t is the defence allowed to use it?

        • May 15, 2013 at 8:22 AM

          If I was on the jury and I believed I heard GZ say “these shall be” after having it explained to me by an expert, then I’d assume GZ was a liar because he never recalled being in a condition to ever say any sentence in the english language with that in it.

          I wonder where this expert claims this utterance occurs?

          I also wonder if this is coming grom MOM to the OS or if it is in the report itself. I’ve not read all the discovery yet.

        • unitron
          May 15, 2013 at 8:26 AM

          This is nothing to do with O’Mara, this guy was hired by the state, as were the 2 people who produced the other report.

        • May 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM

          @willisnewton
          Sorry my mistake. I just posted a reply but forgetting to use this direct route so it has posted at comment #156 after unitron’s at #155.

        • May 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM

          @willisnewton

          Dang… what a mess! I absolutely didn’t know comment numbers change when a new one is posted that has to slot in. Forget the number I gave you in my previous reply, my real reply is posted somewhere under or above this… well, somewhere in the thread!

        • May 16, 2013 at 8:16 AM

          The expert claims that it was uncovered/discovered under the voice over of the 911 operator and the witness/caller talking. So, apparently there are 3 voices on the tape at the same time, and he was able to extract this. One has to wonder what the full tape sounds like, since the reports only focus on the parts that required enhancement and ignore the parts that are already clearly audible.

          My guess is that this was a strategy prepared by the prosecution, to have only the unclear parts analyzed and reported upon, leaving the rest of the tapes out of the reports. Thus, there’s no way for the defense to demand a cleaned up copy from the prosecution. But, instead, will have to hire their own experts to clean up their own copy.

        • May 16, 2013 at 7:52 AM

          Of course the experts may have been suggesting that there was more than one person being captured on the tape, without making such a claim overtly

        • May 16, 2013 at 9:41 AM

          That’s a point. Can’t recall and don’t have it to hand but did any of the experts say anything about there being more voices than the two.

      • May 15, 2013 at 11:05 AM

        @willisnewton
        Oh how I wish they were from MOM, willis, but nope, all the quotes I note in my comment come straight from the horse’s mouth, i.e. cut and pasted direct from Reich’s report!

        In case you don’t have time to read the short report, it favours Trayvon apparently concentrating more on words than the other which appears to concentrate only on a few sounds. However favouring Trayvon could turn moot considering these to paras which I find more than a tad weird for a formal analysis but IMBW which whonoze will clarify I’m sure:

        Reich Report – CAll 1

        These nonconforming segments indicate that Mr. Zimmerman frequently shifts or switches voice modes or speaking styles. His first utterance on CALL 1 is a whispered, “D’ya think I’m crazy here?” At 12 seconds from the beginning of CALL 1, he says “or … urn … the best …address I can give you is one eleven Retreat View Circle.” During the four-second utterance, he shifts from whispered voice to customary voice to detective impression back to customary voice. At 97 seconds, the voiced but tremulous “These assholes, they always get away.” is preceded by a whispered “Dear God” and followed by a whispered “but not on me.”

        Reich Report – Call 3

        For example, approximately one second after the start of CALL 3, Mr. Zimmerman makes a seemingly religious proclamation, “These shall be.” His speech is characterized by the low pitch and exaggerated pitch contour reminiscent ofan evangelical preacher or carnival barker. The statement is challenging for the untrained listener to detect as it occurs simultaneously withTrayvon Martin’s loud, high-pitched, distressed, and tremulous “I’m begging you.” and the 911 Dispatcher’s “Nine-one-one.” Many of Mr. Zimmerman’s “side bar” utterances are subject to such multiple-talker masking effects and to low signal levels.

        The 2nd 17-page report finds nothing conclusive, and analyses a group of sounds rather than words, i.e. “wow”, “Ow”, “cherp”, “wyra?”, “owa” and “swaa”. I haven’t studied it in depth but it appears much more technical than the other, concluding:

        Harmsberger & Hollien’s report Conclusion
        The opinions to follow are based primarily on the aural perceptual evaluations described above. As was stated, even though many problems were evident, the evidence recording provided minimum-to-marginal material for identification purposes. Moreover, the exemplar recordings contained enough material to permit a number of different judgments to be made. Based on the many analyses carried out, the undersigned had to conclude that, while there is evidence to suggest that Mr. Martin made the first two calls/cries (Nos. I and 8) and that Mr. Zimmerman made those identified as 14 and 16, none of these conclusions reached the criterion for a match. Neither speaker could be identified as being responsible for the others.

        Neither report is what I had hoped for, at least, but they don’t appear to prejudice Trayvon’s cause either (except possibly the Reich report for wierd!) and they now make official there are two voices even if we already knew that. So now Trayvon definitely and “officially” screamed, cried, yelled, hollered, shouted, or called out several times, demonstrating GZ’s not been any way truthful about that either… dare I presume you will not be surprised? ; – )

        • May 15, 2013 at 2:31 PM

          I listened to the 911 call with the yelling in the background when it first came around and told myself that this was always going to be a subjective call as to who is heard there. I think a jury will ultimately look elsewhere for a decisive factor, and I hope they look to the credibility of the defendant as the key a verdict.

        • May 15, 2013 at 6:21 PM

          When I worked on the transcript of GZ’s NEN call more than a year ago, I heard and wrote “Thanks god” where Reich says he hears “Dear god”. So, I was not shocked by that. Moreover, I should say that it fits very well with the rolling action as this is the time when TM seems to be passing GZ’s truck and GZ’s fear that I can hear in his tone deflates suddenly.

          When I worked on W11’s 911 call, I also heard the “shall be”. However, I always thought it was coming from Jeremy within the house.

          Reich report is not as technical as Hollien’s. He tends to make comments that will look beyond the scope of his work. This is a problem indeed. However, it does not mean that his work is technically worthless. Reich may have to better describe his methodology and be less judgmental.

          Coming back to the goal of these reports, I have a hard time believing that today’s technology allows computers to make a better judgement than a human ear. Not that I believe that a human ear is perfect, or that the brain that processes the information is flawless. I just believe that voice recognition primarily requires a skilled ear and technology only comes to help that trained ear to pull the information out of the noise.

          So, once you pass over the writing style of Reich, you’ll find indications that there is a methodology behind the report. I cannot comment about that methodology, but I can see that Reich is indeed working on words that average English speaking humans can hear (“Help”, “Help me”) but that are apparently useless to Holliens computer’s software. Else, Hollien would not be be focusing on a small sample of “Yaw” sounds caught on tape.

          Hollien’s report left me with the feeling that they have developed a method that probably works in many situations but would not be best in the current one. They spend many words & paragraphs begging for forgiveness for not being able to pull enough material from the tapes to make a strong statement. So, the wording of the report and the figures may look more professional but the content ones you read the actual data what you really see is that there matching tool laked material hence the outcome that is some unsatisfying matching with TM and some unsatisfying matching with GZ.

          I really really wish Whonoze would comment on the technical part.

        • May 16, 2013 at 6:09 AM

          Nice positive comments Tchoupi which put the reports in a better perspective which is all to the good. I too wish whonoze would surface with his analysis, so with all our hints and nudges he hopefully may do soon.

          Do you think the utterance Reich interprets as GZ saying “but not ON me” could really be “but not FROM me”, because that would make a hell of a lot of sense, i.e.

          “These a**holes they always get away… but not from me!”

          Fantastic fit but I don’t see how “Dear God” or your “Thanks God” can fit in front, so may be it is something near to that but not quite.

          “Dear God/Thanks God. These a**holes they always get away… but not from me!”

          Neither fits easy with me at least.

        • unitron
          May 16, 2013 at 6:19 AM

          IF Zimmerman actually said that stuff and IF it’s actually on the recording, then it could have been “not on me” in the sense of “not on my watch”, or “you’re not going to lay that on me” as in not saddle him with a “failure”.

          But I’ve got to dig out the headphones and do some more listening.

        • May 16, 2013 at 9:39 AM

          That may be the watery divide between us… from this brit’s POV don’t quite see us using “not on me” for that sense, but that said, we do say, “to get one up on somebody” so see your point. Yep, it’s headphones and listening for both then.

  33. May 14, 2013 at 3:01 PM

    Let’s forget the NEN call. Let’s forget GZ’s stories. Let’s forget DeeDee. We are left with
    1) some people saying they heard an argument
    2) some people saying they saw some kind of fighting/wrestling
    3) one dead body shot through the heart at close quarters.
    4) one live person claiming self defence (we’re forgetting the details of his claim).

    So how did the shooter get to be in fear for his life?
    1) the victim has no blood or DNA on him to indicate having touched the shooter
       * so no evidence he caused any of the shooter’s injuries
    * shooter’s injuries not serious enough to be taken as life threatening by anyone
    2) the victim had no weapon or anything that might LOOK like a weapon, with which to threaten the shooter without touching him
    3) therefore the victim had no way to issue a credible threat against the shooter’s life

    No reasonable threat = no self defence.
    QED.

  34. May 14, 2013 at 7:11 PM

    Great resume of what it all may boil down to in the end, aussiekay, i.e. whether GZ’s injuries were sufficient for him to be in reasonable fear for his life or grievous bodily harm and his injuries certainly don’t appear to support that even by a stretch. Unless that is the defence can find a medical expert able to convince the jury in respect of TBI of the type that killed Natasha Richardson, events so rare that it would surely still fall short of “reasonable fear”, more especially considering GZ consistently refused to go to the hospital or the next day to have a scan and I don’t recall he claimed any dizziness, concussion, headaches or similar either.

    My first thought after a quick glance at the audio reports that came out today was that they could clinch the deal, but having studied them more attentively, and read analysis from both sides I’m not so sure they can. In my mind (and hearing) I am convinced I hear Trayvon screaming (I’m begging you, help and stop) while GZ yells “help me”, i.e. “help me retain this guy” as he explains in the re-enactment, but the jury will decide. So as you note it could all boil down to whether it was reasonable for GZ fear for his life because if it wasn’t, even if, and that’s a big IF, Trayvon began the altercation, from how I understand self defence law he would be barred from claiming self-defence having used unreasonable force to defend himself.

    I hope whonoze is going to comment in full on the audio expert’s analysis as his speciality, because from the pro side that holds the as the panacea to the counter that rips them to shreds there must be many nuances and I would be interested to hear his pronouncement on the strengths and weaknesses of each and how a jury might interpret.

  35. unitron
    May 15, 2013 at 4:45 AM

    New post up over at the lounge.

    Somebody ask the professor if he really meant “prevent the defense from” where he said “prevent the State from” in this:

    “6. STATE’S MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING PRIOR CRIMINAL HISTORY

    (This motion seeks to prevent the State from informing the jury that the defendant did not have a prior record because it’s irrelevant)”

    otherwise he’s got the state petitioning to prevent itself from doing something, which seems rather unusual, if not unprecedented.

  36. LeaNder
    May 15, 2013 at 9:49 AM

    I do wish racerrodig would post a list of all of my other identities over at HuffPo so I can go see what I said,

    unitron, I refrained from commenting on that. Sometimes one seemingly has to hold back more frank responses over there. Could the core function be to create a warm space where people mainly agree.

    Fact is unitron, I seem to be questioning some my judgments about you. I hate it, but at one point it seems the comment section somehow took over mentally. In other words at one point I may well have surrendered to group dynamics that initially irritated me too. Pretty hard to admit.

    I had some troubles with your positions, but yes misinformations seemingly develop their own type of dynamics. The usual rumor mill filling the space of the unknown. Obviously I judged you much too easily, simply assuming, without reflecting.

    I am sorry, honestly. No idea what the comment was I mentioned by the way. I don’t really think it matters. Fact is to quote DeeDee I feel guilt

    The fifteen kids type of stuff, is really exactly the type of hyperbole that put me off when I was first entered the comment space over there. Seems one get’s used to it, moves on and simply ignores some or most of it, and concentrate on the more interesting contributors. A close second I agree, is demonization, I often was very puzzled wondering sometimes, rarely in words, if some of the stereotypes one way or another would fit me or people I like perfectly. From the top of my head: GZ did what he does since he is a oner, an outsider.

    I think, I will watch but shut up for a while.

    • unitron
      May 15, 2013 at 10:59 AM

      The 15 kids part was actually kind of funny, and I don’t know if she was even being serious with that “profile/psychoanalysis”.

      It’s also kind of funny that they’re still working themselves up into a lather about me nearly a month after what turned out to be my final appearance (though I wish I’d known it was going to be so I could have included links to stuff from August and stuff from December).

      As far as racerrodig’s accusation that I post under other names at HuffPo, since I know that I don’t do that, and have never posted there under any other name, I’m curious to know what possible “evidence” to the contrary he could possibly have, other than “I want to believe it, so that makes it true”.

      But maybe unsubstantiated personal attacks and adolescent name-calling are as close to an intelligent discussion of the issues as he can get.

  37. May 16, 2013 at 9:49 AM

    gbrbsb :
    Nice positive comments Tchoupi which put the reports in a better perspective which is all to the good. I too wish whonoze would surface with his analysis, so with all our hints and nudges he hopefully may do soon.
    Do you think the utterance Reich interprets as GZ saying “but not ON me” could really be “but not FROM me”, because that would make a hell of a lot of sense, i.e.

    “These a**holes they always get away… but not from me!”

    Fantastic fit but I don’t see how “Dear God” or your “Thanks God” can fit in front, so may be it is something near to that but not quite.

    “Dear God/Thanks God. These a**holes they always get away… but not from me!”

    Neither fits easy with me at least.

    The “thanks god” really is an expression of relief.
    Before, 1:34, GZ clearly sounds nervous as TM is approaching him. While TM was close enough he could see the button on his shirt, GZ was not even sure police was on the way. But, more importantly, he felt that something was wrong with the kid and that he was coming to check him out. So, fear builds up and you can hear it on the NEN call. This is why dispatcher Sean tries to calm him down (“We’ve got him on the wire. JUST let me know if this guy does anything else.”).
    But then, TM just passes GZ. There is no aggression, no violence. Hence, the relief expression “thanks god”. At least that was my understanding. I’m not sure if “dear god” fits as well in English.

    As Unitron wrote, “but not on me” means that these assholes don’t get away on his watch.

    Did you see that MOM wants to delay the trial after these new evidence. I wonder if that’s because of the samples Reich attached to his report.

  38. May 16, 2013 at 11:12 AM

    Ok, I think I get it. So it was GZ’s “Whew… what a relie!f”. But are sure you heard an “s”, i.e. “Thanks God” and not “Thank God” as with an “s” it is a bit too personal, even disrespectful maybe, so I think it more likely and the more typical he would use, i.e. “Thank God the suspicious guy passed” than “Thanks God, the suspicious guy passed” which is so familiar, like me saying, “Thanks Tchoupi, I understand it now”… if you get what I mean.

    • May 16, 2013 at 11:36 AM

      :OP
      Well I let it to the experts. The one we got now just said it is “dear”, not “thank[s]”. So, there was no “s” indeed.

      • May 16, 2013 at 4:53 PM

        Sorry my ignorance, Tchoupi, but what does “OP” mean? Yes you are right about the experts. I got carried away, just that “Dear God” sounds very strange. I will listen to the tape and see if I can hear it too.

        • wassointeresting
          May 16, 2013 at 8:48 PM

          @gbrbsb, tilt your head to the left and look at it again :OP It’s a face with two small eyes, a rather large bulbous nose, and a tongue sticking out the left side of the mouth.

        • May 17, 2013 at 4:59 AM

          Aha! Maybe I shouldn’t but I see an Old English Sheep Dog peering at me with a big wet shiny round nose and a lolling tongue!
          : – )

  39. May 16, 2013 at 6:35 PM

    unitron :
    “An interesting take on the trial”
    Unfortunately, interesting does not always mean completely accurate.

    1. Zimmerman can’t claim self-defense when He provoked the situation. And self-defense is only allowable against an UNLAWFUL attack.

    Florida law actually does allow certain circumstances where the originator of the conflict can claim self-defense.
    Although since one witness says Martin initiated physical contact and the other heard what could have been either of the two pushing or shoving the other, or both doing so simultaneously (or it could have been something else that made a similar sound), but as she was only hearing it over the phone and not seeing it, we can’t be sure from her account who first made physical contact with whom.

    2. Zimmerman confronted Martin after following him. He had no authority to stop Martin on a public street and demand to know what he (Martin) was doing.

    Both alleged witnesses, Zimmerman and Witness 8, say Martin spoke first.
    Neither Martin nor Zimmerman broke any laws by asking each other questions, and neither would have been legally obligated to answer the other.
    Both were within their rights to be where they were and would have been within their rights to have not stayed there.
    What we’ve heard from Witness 8 so far does not indicate that Zimmerman physically “stopped” Martin prior to them exchanging words.
    If, prior to or during the exchange of words, Martin felt endangered, he could easily have eluded Zimmerman on foot.
    If Zimmerman’s gun was already out in his hand, it’s more likely than not that Martin would have said something other that just “What are following me for?”.

    3. Zimmerman was carrying a weapon. The neighborhood watch program prohibits persons who are “on duty” from possessing weapons.

    There is no one monolithic nationwide neighborhood watch program, the edicts of which an individual neighborhood has any obligation to observe.
    Further, Zimmerman was not “on duty” at the time anyway, and there is nothing that obligates a person who is both a licensed concealed carrier and a neighborhood watch volunteer to ignore anything they happen to notice when not “on duty” just because they have their firearm with them.

    4. At no time has Zimmerman asserted that Martin was or had been engaging in anything illegal. (Defending himself against a man with a gun is not illegal).

    Zimmerman didn’t specify any actual criminal conduct, just suspicious, on Martin’s part, until the part where he says Martin hit him.
    If it happened the way Zimmerman claims, that part would have been illegal.

    Unitron,

    I don’t encourage you or anyone to do this, but if you really believe this is perfectly normal then get out every night to follow kids in the street until one day someone sees you. After, when you find some time, I mean no hurry, come back here to tell us how things are going for you.

    Walking in the street is legal. Stalking people is not. It’s an aggression. So, we know who started it.

  40. May 16, 2013 at 11:48 PM

    This “stalking” aspect to me is a huge issue. In my opinion, GZ worked very hard to obfuscate and omit what happened on Twin Trees Lane and “near the clubhouse, now.” He told obvious lies to the SPD, things he must have known wouldn’t hold up to scrutiny yet he felt he had no choice in the matter knowing that the activity was aggressive on his part, possibly criminal. I’m not a lawyer but following someone with his car the way he must have seems to be at least bordering on stalking, which is a real crime.

    Not once but twice he claims he was directed to move in order to observe the “suspicious person.” But in reality he did the moving AS an act of aggression each time. He knows it, and I tend to think Serino and Singleton did too. (Proving it is the trick. I hope the State tries to go there. I don’t know that they will or not.)

    He got caught up in these lies by trying (in vain) to skip ahead to what he felt was “the good part,” where he was on the ground and the teenager was above him. Singleton did what any decent cop would do and got him to keep backing up to the real start of the story. Each time he’s caught more or less red-handed but tries to breeze past his obvious slip ups to get on to the story he wants to tell.

    Getting out to “look for a street sign” was only the tail end of what he’d already started out to accomplish – intimidate the “intruder” who was “trespassing” on “his property.”

  41. amsterdam1234
    May 17, 2013 at 12:17 AM

    Unitron
    You are not exactly accurate either

    unitron :
    “An interesting take on the trial”
    Unfortunately, interesting does not always mean completely accurate.

    1. Zimmerman can’t claim self-defense when He provoked the situation. And self-defense is only allowable against an UNLAWFUL attack.

    Florida law actually does allow certain circumstances where the originator of the conflict can claim self-defense.
    Although since one witness says Martin initiated physical contact and the other heard what could have been either of the two pushing or shoving the other, or both doing so simultaneously (or it could have been something else that made a similar sound), but as she was only hearing it over the phone and not seeing it, we can’t be sure from her account who first made physical contact with whom.

    Please name the witness who said Trayvon initiated physical contact.

    If you want to be exact about Florida Law, you should provide the statutes

    776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—
     
    The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
     
    (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

    (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

    (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

    (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

    Notice that what disappeared is the “reasonable believe” part. And even you must admit that GZ’s injuries don’t cross the threshold of “likely to cause death or great bodily harm”.

    • May 17, 2013 at 7:38 AM

      @amsterdam says in reply to unitron:

      “Please name the witness who said Trayvon initiated physical contact.”

      As I am pretty sure you realise unitron is referring to GZ as the witness claiming Trayvon initiated physical contact I think must be some other point to your question.

      IIRC from several of PL’s posts a while back, and from comments by his more legal and knowledgeable, it appears that if GZ doesn’t take the stand (most likely) and the State decides not to use GZ statements or to use only certain parts, then who started the physical altercation could become a moot point without GZ testifying to it as without GZ’s testimony the only witness to who started the altercation would be DD with her “somebody bumped Trayvon”.

      Sound about right, or am I completely off track?

      • amsterdam1234
        May 17, 2013 at 8:11 AM

        I may take on the kitchen too.

        • May 17, 2013 at 8:40 AM

          Please… because of something I said ??? I can assure you if it was it was not my intention but if anything I said has pushed you to having to further “work it off”, please forgive as it was not intended at all.

  42. amsterdam1234
    May 17, 2013 at 12:51 AM

    Unitron

    Both alleged witnesses, Zimmerman and Witness 8, say Martin spoke first.
    Neither Martin nor Zimmerman broke any laws by asking each other questions, and neither would have been legally obligated to answer the other.
    Both were within their rights to be where they were and would have been within their rights to have not stayed there.
    What we’ve heard from Witness 8 so far does not indicate that Zimmerman physically “stopped” Martin prior to them exchanging words.
    If, prior to or during the exchange of words, Martin felt endangered, he could easily have eluded Zimmerman on foot.
    If Zimmerman’s gun was already out in his hand, it’s more likely than not that Martin would have said something other that just “What are following me for?”.

    Is your claim here that Trayvon was obligated to run away? That Trayvon was not fearfull enough? Trayvon walked away, then ran away, then asked a question, but somehow that is not enough for you?
    Do you realize how much your argument fits the standard argument used by rapists and their apologists? “What was she doing there? If you are dressed like that, you are asking for it. She didn’t fight hard enough, so she must have liked it.” In case you missed that part of the concenssus, it is not oke to blame the victim and look like a reasonable person at the same time.

  43. amsterdam1234
    May 17, 2013 at 1:03 AM

    Unitron

    3. Zimmerman was carrying a weapon. The neighborhood watch program prohibits persons who are “on duty” from possessing weapons.

    There is no one monolithic nationwide neighborhood watch program, the edicts of which an individual neighborhood has any obligation to observe.
    Further, Zimmerman was not “on duty” at the time anyway, and there is nothing that obligates a person who is both a licensed concealed carrier and a neighborhood watch volunteer to ignore anything they happen to notice when not “on duty” just because they have their firearm with them.

    We don’t have to look at other neighborhood watch programs. The one at the RATL prohibited carrying a gun while on “patrol”.

    Stating that Zimmerman was not on “duty” at the time, is disingenuous. There is a wide gap between “ignoring anything they happen to notice” and stalking a person in your car, getting out of your car and running after him, demanding a person to tell you wat they are doing there without identifying yourself.

    GZ could have called the police and leave it at that. Anything beyond that was aggresive behavior on GZ’s part.

  44. amsterdam1234
    May 17, 2013 at 1:05 AM

    Unitron

    4. At no time has Zimmerman asserted that Martin was or had been engaging in anything illegal. (Defending himself against a man with a gun is not illegal).

    Zimmerman didn’t specify any actual criminal conduct, just suspicious, on Martin’s part, until the part where he says Martin hit him.
    If it happened the way Zimmerman claims, that part would have been illegal.

    Unless you are white, then it is called Standing Your Ground.

    • May 17, 2013 at 1:51 AM

      Unitron,

      You woke the Kraken up again.

      Amsterdam,

      Could you flip that patty burger? It is not fully grilled.

      Okay! I’m just kidding.

      ###############

      Unitron: “At no time has Zimmerman asserted that Martin was or had been engaging in anything illegal.”

      That one is too easy Unitron. You’re not in the best of your shape. Here it is:
      “This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something.”.
      Please don’t ask for my source.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 17, 2013 at 7:35 AM

        Half truths and false equivalences disguised as “fair and balanced” critical analysis, do bring out the worst in me.

        Now I am going to direct my energy in painting my bedroom, sanding and waxing the floor. When I am done with that I’ll be sugar and spice again, or at least to tired to care.

  45. May 17, 2013 at 3:03 AM

    whonoze :
    What was traumatic was emptying my old house of all the crap I had accumulated in 13 years. I realized how truly insane my life had become.
    And already sleep deprived from round the clock packing and trashing, I then drove over 3000 miles in less than four days, not having time to do sane things like stop for the night and get a motel room. Perhaps a European can’t really understand just how far California is from Connecticut or just how frighteningly empty Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah and Nevada are.

    Believe me, I kind of know what you went through. We were “neighbors” 5 years ago and we’re “neighbors” now. I moved with my wife and kids from MA to OR. We drove through NY, PA, OH, IN, IL, WI, MN, SD, WY, MT, ID & WA in 7 days.
    To be fully honest, I have to say that I took a week off work for this move, so we could turn that painful change for the kid in a joyful tourist trip. Hence the longer road.

    You guys have a wonderful country. Driving along those never-ending-lakes in the north, or the nerver-ending-corn-fields of MN, or through the desert of WY, or the rocky mountains. Is an amazing experience. I have to had that sleeping in an Amish community in MN, spending lunch time with natives in MT and cowboys of WY after visiting cities like Chicago within few days is seriously surreal. I really love this country.

  46. May 17, 2013 at 4:08 AM

    amsterdam1234 :
    Nice work Tchoupi. It is kind interesting, isn’t it? I tend to get sucked in once I start thinking about it. I just have to know how it works.
    I just finished reading this basic reference paper called “Wireless 911 for Telecommunicators”. I think you may find it helpfull.
    https://www.nc911.nc.gov/pdf/A_TelecommunicatorReference.pdf

    Thanks Amsterdam. It really is interesting. Have a look to that one I just found:
    1) pssb.mt.gov/content/…/docs/AC_council_sept_2010_wireless_info.ppt‎
    2) http://www.apcowireless.com/library/wrlsALIhandbook.pdf

    The way I understand this is that most likely, GZ’s aGPS locations were accessible to dispatcher Sean. However, it looks like Sean has to manually query the information and that it lands on the screen as raw Lat/Lon data (no dot on map).

    Anyhow, it looks like it has to be a 911 call for getting the gps location.

    • May 18, 2013 at 5:19 PM

      I too thought that a call would have to dial 911 for the system to work as a locator. Then, after reading about the Florida system, I realized that they use the same E911 consoles for 311 or non-emergency calls. What they do is, they merely change the designation of the terminal as non-emergency, rather than provide different phones. Thus, if you’re calling a non-emergency number, your call will be routed to an E911 system terminal regardless of what number you call. Which is why there were printouts for gz’s phone that match in style the 911 calls. Because the terminals being used were the same.

      Obviously if you call directly into the police station, you would not get a phone that is on the 911 system at all. You would just reach a land line phone. So, we note that in this case, gz reached an E911 capable terminal.

      Now, why would it make sense for the police department to tell Neighborhood Watcher’s to call in on non-emergency numbers? Obviously they don’t want 911 callers blocked. But, it makes sense to have them call numbers that are E911 capable, because, they are after all, NW and as such, the police already know that these calls will be to report suspicious activity, the police would also want location data, when the caller is NW reporting from a cellular phone. This is because, NW’s can be reporting from locations that they cannot give an address or location data for.

      Note that gz states, before leaving his truck, that he is having trouble giving location data and/or directions. He gives 111 RVC as the clubhouse and Sean the dispatcher quickly corrects that to 1111 RVC. That probably means that Sean has already turned on the gps function, rather than that he knew the neighborhood so well that he could give the address. Remember his console takes calls from a very large number of complexes in the area, so it’s doubtful in the extreme that he’d be so easily able to remember this trivia. Most likely he had it there on his screen. And yes, I did read that the E911 system that Florida implemented though a state wide mandated program, included dynamic map displays, iirc.

      I feel that this information, more likely was what prompted Sean to ask “are you following him?” Because Sean had asked gz for his name, and having entered that information, the computer would show that he’s the listed NW and give his address, which is why Sean only asked to confirm that this was in fact gz, and not someone impersonating him. Sean never got the complete home address, but again, iirc it’s right there on the call sheet. Most likely filled in by the computer system. So, yes I’m guessing, but the guesses make pretty good sense, for the task being performed.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM

        Lonnie
        The systems at the psap are able to process location data when the data is present, it doesn’t generate location data. You can buy a 3D tv, but if your television station broadcasts in 2d, your 3D tv is going to show 2d images.

        • May 19, 2013 at 4:24 PM

          Understood but by 2012 all phones had chips onboard, installed by the manufacturers that handled the gps function with an instruction call. It would be Sean’s choice whether or not to call for gps data. Apparently he did.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 19, 2013 at 7:05 PM

          @lonnie
          I looked at specs describing the system. Basicly it is a database with location data where providers use an interface to enter data and psap’s use an interface to retrieve data from that database. If you found newer specs which shows that location data can be directly obtained by a dispatcher behind a console, please give me a link.
          From a design point of view, it makes perfect sense to exchange information through a database. Every provider has a different system and uses different methodologies to acquire the location of the caller. Phones have different os’ and psap’s use different systems to handle their calls. A database would standardize the exchange of information.

          This system has the process of creating location data and the process of retrieving that data, seperated into 2 different processes. That would be the desired way for the system to function. The caller initiates and maintains the process of creating a record of its location without the need for the call to be continuous. In other words if you call 911 and all you can say is help before your call is disconnected, you can still be found through the data your phone is feeding to the Ali database.

          I don’t think a different gps chip has anything to do with a change to the system. FCC never cared how the providers obtained the location data. The requirements include a response within a certain time, and a certain accuracy of the distance to the location of the phone.

          I may be wrong, and I would be very interested how they dealt with the numerous problems I can think of in a system you are proposing exists.

        • May 20, 2013 at 8:26 AM

          Try and simplify, you seem to be going in way deeper than need be. The E911 system has a method of obtaining location data from cell phones and putting that information on a map, and filling those input boxes for the printouts we’re seeing.

          So, we look at the data on those sheets and we try to decide where it could have come from.
          On the page for the NEN call it lists the location as TTL, now we know that gz never told the dispatcher that he was on TTL, instead he said that he did not know the name of the street he was on. His phone is registered to an address on RVC : “nearest intersection LOW”. So gz’s records cannot be the source of what’s on that sheet.

          Unless Sean has remembered the addresses of clubhouses in every subdivision in Orlando, he can’t know off hand that 111 RVC is not the address of the RATL clubhouse, but that the address is 1111 RVC instead. Even if Sean could call up a map of the RATL he still could not pinpoint gz’s location and he would not be inclined to guess at it.

          So, we don’t have to know the intimate details of how the system works, all we have to know is that it does. We know that Sean has access to location data if he chooses to activate it. My guess is that when they assign terminals as NEN /311 they switch gps off. But, they have the option of turning it on if the dispatcher needs it.

          gz is calling in as NW and is having trouble giving his location, this probably caused Sean to activate gps and obtain gz’s location, thus he’s able to instantly correct 111 RVC to 1111 RVC. and the console printout auto-fills location as TTL and “nearest intersection LOW” data that should otherwise be unavailable if not for gps locator service.

        • May 20, 2013 at 10:49 AM

          I understand you guys are saying that there are other ways for the system to generate the information we see in the reports. But my question would be, why generate pseudo gps location data on a system where real gps is available? You wouldn’t do that because it has a great potential to cause potentially life threatening confusion. A system that has real gps will not have a shred of pseudo gps/location data.

          If the system were to take Sean’s entry of 111 RVC RATL, and turn that into location and nearest intersection data, then there is a potential to have emergency people think that is real location data when it is not. They don’t enter into the system where the caller says the call is coming from, in to the data fields where it could appear to be confirmed data. They put it into the narrative field so that the readers know that it is caller reported data.

          Emergency service protocols will prohibit any system generating untrue location data.
          They will not take the callers word for it and mark his location on a map. They probably would not even have a map enabled system if they didn’t have the gps needed to require it. The old 911 call centers used printed maps on the walls, not maps on console screens. Even when caller ID came in they still used printed maps because all they had was land line data and the position of the phones did not change.

          The whole purpose of E911 was to overcome situations where the caller was unable to give their location. Because people calling with cell phones can and do move around. So the location data must be able to dynamically update or the system is useless. Way back in 2000 cell phones were getting gps data using the civil satellite system, Bill Clinton made military gps available in 2000 to civilians and during the period from 2000 onward mfg’s began designing chips to provide gps service as a standard feature on cell phones. Many applications that run on cell phones took advantage of the gps chip and would poll it for data to be sent to their own servers.

          By 2012 gps was very far along. It is common for taxi’s, van and other transportation and delivery services to have gps on their dashboards. The service is free, all you need is the gps device which is loaded with maps. You get to poll satellites for your location data and your on board chip converts that into a location and the software puts it on the map, keeping pace with you as you drive. So, by 2012 GPS is no longer exotic technology. In fact, the E911 system was evolving since it was deployed in 2005-6.

          So while I get that there are may possible ways for the dispatchers console to obtain the location data shown. I have to doubt that it is actually using pseudo location data, obtained by merely reading maps and using caller reported addresses. Since that would be a dangerous thing to do. The system is showing what it is capable of determining on it’s own, by polling the phone being contacted. That is the only thing that makes sense from phone locating protocols for emergency services purposes.

          Nor does it make any sense to have separately designed 311 and 911 consoles. Design them all the same, since you never know when you’ll need more of one than the other. This way they can simply be assigned to which ever function has the most traffic. That means, all the functions available to one console mode are probably available to all consoles or modes at the flick of a switch. By 2012 E911 had already gone through plenty of upgrades. So, it’s hard to imagine them having what amounts to a pseudo location data system of any sort.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 20, 2013 at 9:21 AM

          @lonnie
          I’ve done the simpelest thing possible. I looked up the functional description of the E911 system and read it.

          I designed, build and implemented a number of cross system interfaces. For four years as an employee of a multinational IT company, I would do the first assesment or due diligence of the IT system that companies wanted to outsource to my company. That’s what I did, go read system documentation, talk to the system developers and the programmers who maintainedit, and based on that information, I would advice my employer about the risks and the costs involved, if they were to take over a companies system.

          I don’t have a lot of expertises, but I think I can say something coherent about this particular system.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 19, 2013 at 6:24 AM

      Are you talking about the the Re-bid for ALI information? As I understand it that procedure is used if a 911 call is made, but the ALI information is not provided due to a failure in the system, or to update the location in case the caller is traveling.

      This is how I understand the system works. The providers have to acquire the location information in case 911 is called. They can do that by triggering software that is installed on the phone itself. In that case when a caller dials 911, GPS is turned on if it was off, the phone requests coordinates from the satelites, the phone transmits the coordinates to the base station, the base station adds the information to an Ali database, the database returns an Ali nr. to the base station, the base station transmits the Ali nr to the appropriate psap. If that psap has e911 ready system, the ali console will query the ali database with the ali nr it received and then updates the console with the information from the ali database.

      The trigger for information to be added to the Ali database is if someone dials 911. Procedurale it would be impossible to require providers to test if phonenumbers other then 911, should also be added to the Ali database. A generic number like 311 would work.

      In GZ’s call there is no Ali nr. because location data was not added to the Ali database.

      Maybe I am wrong. Providers may be using the costly investment they had to make, as a product for sale for commercial purposes. I think privacy laws would prohibit that, but who knows.

      I think there is a good chance there is gps data for GZ’s phone. What are the odds for someone who bolts his chair at the office, to install a locator app on his phone in case it gets stolen? Or for a person who is known to be thrifty, to buy the discounted car insurance that requires gps data from your car to be registered?

      • May 19, 2013 at 3:48 PM

        Because 911 and 311 calls all come into the same E911 consoles, I believe that gps data was available to Sean, even though his E911 terminal was designated to be a 311/ NEN for the shift.

        gz gave questionable location data, when he gave the clubhouse address as 111 RVC. That probably prompted Sean to toggle on the gps and have a look. He was then able to correct gz with 1111 RVC clubhouse. Now note, that printout shows TTL and nearest intersection LOW. The only way Sean could have gotten that information is via gps, because gz claimed he could not remember the name of the street he was on (TTL) so he never gave his actual location to the dispatcher Sean.

        So, he called 311 from a cell phone and did not give his location, yet the call sheet correctly shows his approximate location for the narrative given. Conclusion: Sean had GPS on gz!

        • unitron
          May 19, 2013 at 3:57 PM

          “So, he called 311 from a cell phone and did not give his location, yet the call sheet correctly shows his approximate location for the narrative given. Conclusion: Sean had GPS on gz!”

          Do you mean that Zimmerman literally dialed a “three” and then a “one” and then a second “one”, or were you using 311 as the generic “the number you call when it’s not bad enough, or not yet bad enough, for 911”?

        • May 19, 2013 at 6:32 PM

          311 is generally a non-emergency number. I don’t know what number they gave NW’ers to dial, but from the printout we know that regardless of what number gz dialed it went into the E911 system to an E911 enabled terminal, designated for that shift as a non-emergency response terminal. gz’s inability to give clear location information would have caused Sean to flip on the gps function to have a look see. That’s probably how he knew the clubhouse for RATL was 1111 RVC. Since it’s unlikely he’s getting many calls from the same locations around the city all year long, it’s unlikely that he’s remembered all the streets, complexes, gated communities and clubhouse addresses. So, it’s more likely that gps gave him the info he sought. He could not have gotten the TTL location from anyone other than gps and certainly not the nearest intersection data. gz did not tell him that he was on TTL, so Sean could not have entered it into the console himself. So where else could that information have come from if not gps?

        • May 20, 2013 at 1:17 AM

          Lonnie,

          You misunderstand the High/Low Cross Road data in the call log. Those are the 2 nearest cross roads to the given address.
          In GZ’s call the address is 1111 RVC, so the nearest crossroads are TTL/RVC & LOW/RVC, hence RRL/RVC as High/Low cross roads.

          From the summary I made here http://i.imgur.com/O7dybeEh.png, I concluded that the High/Low cross road is generated automatically from the address.

          The address was given to Sean by GZ orally. No gps data involved.

          The ALI is the only location input that can be generated automatically. However, the 2 non-911 calls (GZ & W15) show blank ALI. All 911 calls show address of cell towers.

          From the documents Amsterdam & I found, it appears that there gps location may not be automatically transmitted to dispatcher. The dispatcher may have to manually request it by pressing a button. So, you can forget about a life tracking system with the dispatcher able to see on his screen every single move the caller makes.

          Finally, only 911 calls offer this gps location . Hence the blank ALI in the log of GZ’s call.

        • May 20, 2013 at 11:26 AM

          I meant “Hence TTL/LOW ” and not “RRL/RVC” which makes no sense.

        • May 20, 2013 at 11:45 AM

          Pshaw… We know you well enough to know that you know your stuff and that this is merely typo’s or something. I typed a post a day or so ago and, while reading it a second time before posting I noted a couple of errors, there was an r where I had typed n and a couple of other errors. I changed them and read it again… what the…??? All the errors I had just corrected were back again. So, I went over it again and changed them back. This time I noted that as soon as I made a change and moved on, the correction changed back. What could be causing this? I erased the post and re wrote it, no problem. But I have no idea what was disallowing corrections.

  47. May 17, 2013 at 8:37 AM

    The human brain likes patterns. A bunch of dots looks like a circle. We see faces in clouds. Five or six stars make a “shape” we name, eg Big Dipper, leaving out “seeing” others in between.

    Same with sounds. We pick out a few sibilants or a vowel sounds, and mentally fill in the blanks with what we expect to be there. Which is why people can suddenly “hear” things they’ve been TOLD to listen out for, on tapes they heard nothing on before.

    There is zero similarity between “dear” and “thanks” and big difference between thank and thanks, considering the sibilant should be easy to hear if it were there.

    So, a lot of guesswork there, not too scientific.

    What the cleaned tape DOES show is
    * two voices in conversational interaction
    * NO muffling of either by eg, hands over nose and mouth
    * one demanding tone of voice, one nervous and fearful

    which tells a story without a single word being heard.

  48. unitron
    May 17, 2013 at 9:01 PM

    tchoupicaillou :
    Unitron,
    You woke the Kraken up again.
    Amsterdam,
    Could you flip that patty burger? It is not fully grilled.
    Okay! I’m just kidding.
    ###############
    Unitron: “At no time has Zimmerman asserted that Martin was or had been engaging in anything illegal.”
    That one is too easy Unitron. You’re not in the best of your shape. Here it is:
    “This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something.”.
    Please don’t ask for my source.

    “At no time has Zimmerman asserted that Martin was or had been engaging in anything illegal.” was me quoting the comment on Litman’s blog to which Lonnie Starr had linked, not me saying that myself.

  49. May 17, 2013 at 10:17 PM

    At some point before the start of the trial – ie in the next 23 days the defense should be giving the prosecution whatever discovery they have left to provide. What will be in that?

    Anything? I’m not a lawyer but it seems like there should be some more data to parse…

    • May 18, 2013 at 12:28 PM

      Haha, they have to hand over their version of their analysis of the tapes, if and when they find an expert to analyse them at this late stage.

      Apart from that, they’re fairly empty-handed. They don’t seem to have come up with any new witness that has, say, video of Trayvon attacking GZ.

      It’s getting close to just a guessing game for us, to see which of the many known bits of evidence the prosecution will show to the jury.

      The prosecution goes first. So the jury officially doesn’t know GZ is claiming self-defence. So they don’t have to demolish his claims of self-defence. They just have to show murder. The forensics support murder. The 911 tape supports murder (even if none of the words are clearly made out). The NEN call and stalking support premeditation. For motive they have GZ’s statement to Hannity “I was running out of time, I was afraid the police would shoot me…..”

      A lot of what bcclist put weeks of work into won’t come up, I think. They can prove it without. And especially if they do have GPS from both phones.

      • ada4750
        May 18, 2013 at 8:51 PM

        @aussiekay “I was running out of time, I was afraid the police would shoot me…..”

        GZ said that ??!! Meaning what exactly? If, like he said, he was under Trayvon, why the police would have shot him?

        At first glance, this is a very damaging statement from GZ.

        • May 19, 2013 at 6:05 AM

          He said it on the Hannity interview. I think it was exactly….” I was running out of time. if the police came around the corner and see me with a gun they might shoot me…”

          Damaging indeed, and the State had the tape subpoenaed before the final credits rolled.

          Of course he’ll try to explain he meant he was running out of time to save his life (as was about to black out/bleed to death from the head-bashing). But this also makes no sense as he KNEW the police were only a few seconds away, surely he’d have survived long enough for them to come and save him?

          But worry about being seen with the gun would be real only if he’s visibly waving it about. Like holding someone at gun point, not the fraction of a second a true self-defence shot takes to do.

  50. ada4750
    May 20, 2013 at 3:51 AM

    I wrote a while ago that even the most mysterious behavior can become crystal clear once we are aware of the unknown motivation behind it. For DeeDee, her citizen status, thanks to sundance, might be the explication. It looks like the most probable but there can be some others. But they all have in common that she absolutely didn’t want the spot on her.

    In this case, she might very well said nothing to her parents (or supposedly parents) before they got a call from Mr. Crump. And then, DeeDee’s family probably made up some lies about her age and her health in an attempt to remain anonymous. Poor Mr. Crump, if this is what happened.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 20, 2013 at 7:20 AM

      That is pure speculation from the worst source possible. That’s the same source that claims Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery. Speculating about DD’s citizenship is a continuation of the meme that AA people are not real Americans.

      This trial isn’t about DD, it is about GZ profiling, stalking, and killing an unarmed minor.

    • May 20, 2013 at 9:46 AM

      Ada,

      The guys at TCTH have built layers of theories over layers of theories so many times that they created their own alternate universe.
      In that universe TM is a gangsta drug dealer with a harem of hoes that he can pay for sex with drug and DeeDee together with DeeDee #2 & possibly other alternate DeeDees are just part of that harem.
      That universe is very flexible too since evidences from the real world can reshape it with them not even noticing. Indeed, in their universe the cell phone found by TM’s body was not his. It was that of a little girls living at the RATL. Now that the phone lock has been hacked, and that videos have been found, they know the cellphone was used by Chad & TM’s cousin and possibly Austin Brown, to film TMs attack on GZ.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 20, 2013 at 10:02 AM

        Lol.
        Excellent description of tcth.

        • May 20, 2013 at 11:15 AM

          Well… you summed that up better than I did: “Speculating about DD’s citizenship is a continuation of the meme that AA people are not real Americans.”.
          Although, if you drop the “real” out of “real Americans” you’d be right on.

        • ada4750
          May 20, 2013 at 9:02 PM

          amsterdam1234 and tchoupicaillou I am not putting DeeDee on trial. Actually it is quite the opposite. I am looking for explication about the very opaque mystery around her.

          I didn’t make one single pejorative statement against AA and i know very well that THC is full of crap. I read them (some of them should i say) very fastly and get the haitian illegal immigrant hypothesis from that.

          There is a big haitian communauty in Miami and unfortunately many of them are illegal. So it is not impossible at all. And if DeeDee is one of them maybe she is the only one where she lives (or lived).

          In conclusion, there must be an extraordinary reason why DeeDee remained silent. I don’t buy for a second the possibility that being scared of the police is the only reason.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 21, 2013 at 2:58 AM

          Since DD is not the one on trial, speculations about her personal life should be off limits.

          That particular unfounded speculation about DD’s citizenship is pejorative towards AA in this instance. I don’t appreciate you promulgating that last dig about DD’s legitimacy.

          You are the one who seems a tad obsessed with DD. At least everytime you show up, she seems to be the person you are most concerned about.

          I don’t know why DD was reluctant to go to the police, but having been able to watch the threats and the insults on the internet and media, I think I may think twice too if I ever ended up in a situation like she did.

      • ada4750
        May 21, 2013 at 7:18 PM

        amsterdam1234 I read the rest of the blog, especially the always very interesting whonoze. I don’t interfere because i have nothing to add.

        About DeeDee, she and GZ are the only persons on earth who know at 100% if GZ stalked Trayvon all the way or not. Isn’t a good reason to be mostly concern by these two persons?

        You wrote that if were in DeeDee’s shoes you would hesitate to call the police after you learned your dear friend faith. Pfiouu!!!!!

        First of all, if DeeDee did call the police the same night or few days later we would never heard about her. For the simple reason that Serino would have certainly brought charges against GZ and this case would have stay in Sanford limits. So your objection about the internet insults doesn’t hold.

        There is many illegal haitians in Miami. Where is the problem if i mention it? I don’t blame them at all. I would probably try the same in their place.

  51. May 20, 2013 at 11:42 AM

    aussiekay :
    He said it on the Hannity interview. I think it was exactly….” I was running out of time. if the police came around the corner and see me with a gun they might shoot me…”
    Damaging indeed, and the State had the tape subpoenaed before the final credits rolled.
    Of course he’ll try to explain he meant he was running out of time to save his life (as was about to black out/bleed to death from the head-bashing). But this also makes no sense as he KNEW the police were only a few seconds away, surely he’d have survived long enough for them to come and save him?
    But worry about being seen with the gun would be real only if he’s visibly waving it about. Like holding someone at gun point, not the fraction of a second a true self-defence shot takes to do.

    Hey, I missed that one! This is really interesting since I always thought that GZ would not fear for his life without aiming and then shooting at the threatening individual.

    • May 20, 2013 at 1:29 PM

      So yea, a bit odd to feel in danger from one person so shooting another. But it really was Trayvon’s fault, you see. If it hadn’t been for him, GZ wouldn’t be holding the gun and therefore risking being mistakenly shot by the police. And it worked. By shooting so fast he was able to let go the gun before the cops got there, so his life was spared.

      Spared, but it’s over.

    • May 20, 2013 at 9:04 PM

      @tchoupicaillo
      @aussiekay

      He said it on the Hannity interview. I think it was exactly….” I was running out of time. if the police came around the corner and see me with a gun they might shoot me…”

      It couldn’t have been the Hannity interview as I just checked the transcript and as far as I can find GZ makes no mention of the police seeing him with a gun whatsoever. He does say, where he describes the alleged struggle for “the” gun, “I… I didn’t have more time”,:

      HANNITY: Do you remember when you yourself reached for your weapon? Do you remember that moment.

      ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

      HANNITY: Tell us about that.

      ZIMMERMAN: At that point, I realized that it wasn’t my gun, it wasn’t his gun, it was the gun.

      HANNITY: Did he say anything? Because you said he was talking a lot about the gun. Did he say he noticed the gun?

      ZIMMERMAN: He said, “You are going to die tonight m**********r and took one hand off of my mouth and I felt it going down my chest towards my belt and my holster, and that’s when I… I didn’t have anymore time.

      HANNITY: Do you think you acted more out of a conscious thought? I mean, I know these events happen very quickly. Do you remember conscientiously thinking I have to grab my gun or did you just do it? Was there a conscious thought that went through your head that you thought you were going to die and that you had to take this you had to get your weapon and fire?

      ZIMMERMAN: I’d love to give you an answer.

      HANNITY: You don’t know?

      ZIMMERMAN: It just happened so quickly.

      I too seem to recall he once said something about, “I was running out of time”, but it must have been during one of the SPD interviews or the re-enactment.

    • May 20, 2013 at 9:55 PM

      @tchoupicaillo
      @aussiekay

      Sorry aussiekay, my error, I searched the Hannity transcript for “gun” but GZ would say “firearm” in the instance I was trying to find, wouldn’t he ?

      So GZ does tell Hannity he feared the police would shoot him but not related to his “running out of time” as it is a load of conversation and at least one commercial break further on from when he tells Hannity “I… I didn’t have anymore time”. So IMO a “running out of time to shoot” narrative doesn’t seem to fit, at least from the Hannity interview, and GZ qualifies his fear as being “after” he had discharged his firearm, but not because he was out of time:

      HANNITY: The first person you saw. And he said you looked like you had been, quote, “butt whooped,” like you had had a fight and you were asking call my wife, just tell my wife. But, you know, he was acting like it was nothing. Is that how you were feeling at the time? Because you didn’t find out, you said, until later you said that Trayvon had passed away.

      ZIMMERMAN: No, I knew that I had discharged my firearm, and I was scared, nervous. I also thought the police were going to come and see me with the firearm and shoot me. I mean, I was terrified.

  52. May 20, 2013 at 4:01 PM

    Tchoupi had asked what I make of the audio expert reports. Reich’s report seems very preliminary and very sketchy on the details of how he reached his conclusions. There are no obvious technical red flags in what he does report, though until he reveals his actual method in detail there’s really no way to critique it. If I was an opposing ‘expert’ for the defense, I would find his report next to worthless in terms of trying to make a counter-argument, since what he has written so far just amounts to, “trust me, I’m an expert.” I had written a post on Reich last June, in which I noted he does seem to be credible. He has a PhD, and was a professor at a real university, so his scholarly work has to have passed academic peer review. He seems to know what he’s doing.

    I don’t really know what someone like Reich can pull out of a recording with scientific authority, and what amounts to subjective guess work. I’d have to see the details, and even then it might be over my head. We have only heard .mp3s of the recording in question, and Reich has the ‘original’ digital recordings. He doesn’t note what compression format they are in. He says they are .wav files, but .wav is a ‘container’ that can contain many different audio data formats and codecs. Regardless, he’s working from a more accurate source than what’s available to the public. He does say that while the recordings are limited in frequency response, they are in 16 bit depth, and it is only this level of quality which made his analysis possible, and that makes sense. A 16 bit file with a bandwidth from 40-4kHz would be good enough to parse the details of human speech.

    One possible ‘red flag’ in his report is that he says there are four voices audible in W11’s 911 call: W11, the 911 operator, GZ and TM. Yet, assuming both GZ and TM are audible, there would be five voices, as he does not mention JeremyW20.

    On the plus side he notes that his attempts to apply global enhancement algorithms to the recordings yielded no improvement in audibility, and in some cases “compromised” the intelligibility. This is what I would have expected. In order to use these kinds of filters, you need to know what the original sounds are supposed to be, so you can set the parameters of the noise reduction in ways that do not not alter the phonemes. Of course, this is the case in most audio production, where there is a script available, or an ear-witness who recalls what was said (in the case of a location interview, for example). But if you don’t know what the original is supposed to be, your settings are just a shot in the dark, and the waveforms can easily be distorted to the point where they sound like something they’re not. This was the problem with the fool from CNN who applied BNR software to GZ’s epithet and claimed it revealed he said “f***ing cold”.

    What Reich claims he can do is take a complex waveform resulting from two or three voices talking at the same time, and use various forms of spectrographic analysis to isolate the individual voices well enough to determine what words are being spoken, where the naked ear hears only jumbled crosstalk. I know that’s possible in theory, but I have no idea how effective it is in practice.

    I would guess that if Reich is called at trial, he will offer a lot of detail about his method, with lots of charts and graphs, none of which will make much if any sense to the jury, but will frame his conclusions with a heavy patina of scientific expertise. In the OJ trial, the defense had expert witnesses on DNA evidence and medical forensics who clearly were more knowledgeable and experienced than the witnesses who testified for the State. Since MOM has named no expert witnesses whatsoever, and is focusing his efforts on trying to get the recording of W11’s call ruled inadmissible, I would guess he has no one lined up who can come even close to challenging Reich on his own turf. So, assuming Judge Nelson admits the recording, I would guess the jury would tend to accept Reich’s word on what it reveals.

    As to the seeming oddness of Reich describing GZ’s masked utterances as resembling religious incantations: I doubt Reich would have been looking for anything like that, so maybe it just emerged organically from his efforts to make sense of the speech patterns. I certainly wouldn’t put something like that past GZ, he of ‘it’s all part of God’s plan’ and all, especially given that the slurred speech of the NEN call tells me GZ was pretty well buzzed on booze when he made his call. GZ seems more than a bit delusional, and I’m convinced that he has some sort of personality disorder, but I would guess that delusional people carry around some sort of narrative that serves to justify and reinforce their notions to themselves. Given GZ’s background, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that when push comes to shove, he views the world through a certain kind of religious frame, in which he is ‘God’s Warrior,’ yet this perspective is something he largely keeps private and may only manifest itself after he’s had one bump too many…

    • May 20, 2013 at 8:17 PM

      Thanks for that, whonoze, some have been anxiously awaiting your expertise and analysis which is a great read as per usual with lots of interesting info to go on. I get what you mean about GZ’s religious zeal and personality disorder but I still fear Reich’s interpretation and wording, i.e. “reminiscent of an evangelical preacher or carnival barker”, could be off putting to some jurists. And did I miss something during my absence as the last time I looked MOM & Co were trying to get the experts barred through the Frye motion NOT the 911 call which they say they want the jury to hear as is with no expert explanations.

      No comment on the H&H report? There is a polemic as to whether the final utterance before the shot, i.e. “stop”, that Reich attributes to Trayvon, as do all of us, is H&H’s sound No. 16 which they attribute 70% to GZ and 0% to Trayvon. I haven’t had time to study it though.

      Returning to Reich, apart from the “lots of charts and graphs” do you reckon he will be playing any of his isolated “enhancements” to the jury or will he just rely on the original and his technical explanations?

    • May 20, 2013 at 8:57 PM

      Whonoze! I see you’re brutally coming back the unreal life of GZvsFL with one of the longest post ever.

      I take away from your post that:
      1) The report is not descriptive enough for you to judge the technical background that support the claims Reich is making.
      2) The little technical information revealed in the report look right and logical, and the feasibility of ID’ing voices in a cross-over talk is not a distant SciFi technology.
      3) The description Reich makes of GZ’s speech pattern and the religious comments he could extract are possibly part of the investigative process.

      It is possible that GZ was under the influence of something. He clearly could not remember the name of TTL while he knows the name of a street he has nothing to do with. Check that one out…

    • May 21, 2013 at 10:33 AM

      We have to remember that he is a “hired expert” as such, he can only work and report on what his “boss” gives him to work on. My guess is that, the prosecution, knowing that the defense wants to use the prosecutions work, instead of hiring their own experts, they gave him only selected items to work on, one’s they believed would be useful enough at trial. Thus the report does not cover all available material in the files. That’s called strategy! The rest we can get at trial.

  53. May 20, 2013 at 9:59 PM

    Another interesting couple of vids on youtube: Trayvon’s walk home…
    Part I http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_8J0kLbtKpY
    Part II http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=cruYJsVjnHw

    The music is terrible but the idea is excellent. My take wayas:
    1) it if TM looked for a shortcut, he probably lost his way and time too,
    2) were the gates to the other subdivisions open?

    • May 20, 2013 at 10:03 PM

      The guy made another one…

    • May 21, 2013 at 1:30 AM

      @tchoupicaillo (whatever that stands for!)

      Good videos all of them. Show perfectly the hilly terrain, (just devisable from Google 3D “standing” on Oregon Av.), that Trayvon would have had to navigate at night and in the wet, in a not too familiar area.

      In the first video you posted IMBW, and I will have to check it again with GZ’s re-enactment, Google maps, and Bing, but I think they’ve used the wrong cut through for Taffe’s home as the configuration of the buildings doesn’t appear to correspond with the one they point at in the re-enactment. Nonetheless, great work on behalf of Sanford Watch.

      I personally think Trayvon took a shortcut through Lakes edge (gated) and/or Colonial Village (not gated) and IMO to enter RATL he probably didn’t cut through by Taffe’s, but took the cut through nearer Oregon Av. which leads to RVC in direction Club House. Otherwise he was likely lost because, if he took the cut through next to Taffe’s then his quickest route home would have been south down RVC direction Long Oak Way which leads directly to Brandy’s and not the long way via the Club House. Furthermore, considering the terrain and weather conditions as well as the dark it doesn’t seem logical tat would have taken the hilly and long route unless lost or trying to loose GZ.

      In any case, IMO, unless the prosecution has CCTV of Trayvon on his way home being followed by GZ, or has satellite based GPS data to pinpoint his and GZ’s routes proving GZ was following him from even before he entered RATL, then, as willis, I don’t think the route will be of any importance in the trial whatsoever, except if he didn’t enter via Taffe’s or had a completely different route all of which would prove GZ lies… so, no surprise there then!

      • wassointeresting
        May 21, 2013 at 2:06 AM

        @gbrbsb, it’s two names “Tchoupi” and “Caillou”. He’s french. Don’t know if either of those names are his in real life, but they are characters in children’s literature/cartoons.

        • May 21, 2013 at 3:50 AM

          C’est exactement ca.

        • May 21, 2013 at 4:39 AM

          Merci, WSI. And it’s not the first time you have come to the rescue with a useful titbit of information. Thank you again.

        • wassointeresting
          May 21, 2013 at 10:51 AM

          No problemo. 🙂

    • May 21, 2013 at 1:28 PM

      Again, whatever route TM took seems academic unless there is proof of it, which I tend to doubt. Even if there are GPS records of both individuals in the the other complexes I’m not sure that would rise above a reasonable doubt standard anyway, given the vague nature of GPS on a cell phone. What it would do as others have pointed out is further confirm that GZ lied and is pushing a false narrative, which we already know and can prove easily since what he claims happened is not physically possible given the timing of the NEN call.

      There’s only one place that we have multiple sources to confirm the real if approximate position of both individuals , and that’s “near the clubhouse now’ combined with Dee Dee’s “mail thing” and both of those align very well with the NEN call recording timings. Then of course there is the pool video which seems to confirm GZ’s position on TTL facing the mail kiosk. I think any and ALL jury members can be convinced that GZ faced the mail kiosk as TM walked past him, and then GZ then moved his vehicle during the NEN call after “these axxholes always get away.”

  54. May 21, 2013 at 12:02 AM

    gbrbsb :

    Returning to Reich, apart from the “lots of charts and graphs” do you reckon he will be playing any of his isolated “enhancements” to the jury or will he just rely on the original and his technical explanations?

    I can’t be sure, of course, but I doubt he has audible isolations that a jury can listen to and hear the things he says he has found. It sounds like he’s only able to parse the phonemes by looking at the waveforms, spectrographs, etc. I would guess that knowing what words he thinks he has uncovered, he can filter the segments to make the buried words somewhat more audible, such that when someone might speak the words along with the recording, a listener could tell that they are consistent, if not identical. This is what I did with GZ saying, “They’ll see my truck: the keys are in the ignition,” the later part of which is buried under Sean talking. Various people think they hear a variety of different things here, but none of the other suggestions fit with the recording. If you speak them out along with the recording, it’s not possible to match the correct number of syllables, the rhythms, the phonetic bits that are audible, but “the keys are in the ignition” does match…

    In general, TV shows have given the public a totally unrealistic idea about what is possible in ‘enhancing’ digital audio and video files. On shows like CSI, anything can be made crystal clear by a few keystrokes on a computer. In real life, if the information isn’t there, you can’t get it back. Experts like Reich are scraping the bottom of the data barrel, trying to piece together what was said from minimal bits of information. It’s a bit like an archeologist reconstructing a complete skeleton from one or two remaining bones. Another scientist could quibble with the methods and conclusions if the ‘experts’ shows their work, but a lay person is going to have to take them on their word. When the jury listens to the section of the recording where Reich avers GZ says “but not on me.”, they may hear only a mumble or a breath… nothing intelligible to them at all, but Reich can pull out his waveforms and spectral charts and explain how he’s SURE that’s what’s there.

    BTW, I haven’t been following recent developments that closely, so i may be wrong about MOM trying to get the 911 recording itself excluded. It does seem more likely he would try to get any expert analysis excluded, on the basis that it’s ‘junk science’. Voice analysis of various sorts is common enough now, used by the NSA to track terrorist suspects and whatnot, that I doubt the judge would exclude any and all expert analysis. IANAL, but I would guess any issues with the experts MOM might raise would go to weight, not admissibility. At least I hope not. I’d like to see Reich put on his show in court, and see what he’s actually got.

    • May 21, 2013 at 1:47 AM

      Ah, of course, I get you. And the jury should at least have a clearer version than the one we have had to listen to and work with. Never watched CSI; tried it but couldn’t stand it, much too slick and synthetic for me. No, my following of American cop series, which is not avid, goes better with the likes of “Hill Street Blues”, and, more recently, “The Closer”, which I watch as light entertainment when too tired to do much else but fall asleep. Yes from the pack of motions filed recently MOM & Co are keeping the call but banning the experts… maybe they can’t afford one of their own!

      • May 21, 2013 at 11:56 AM

        That’s fine, too.

        The jury will then hear the tape without expert interference. They’ll hear a young person screaming in fear and the sound of a shot ending the screams. And draw their own conclusions.

  55. May 21, 2013 at 12:35 PM

    I had fun yesterday evening writing little perl scripts to calculate and then plot all possible paths GZ could have taken to end up at the spot where TM died.
    Check the result in the figure : http://i.imgur.com/HSNirZCh.jpg

    The figure illustrates the impossibility to pretend knowing anything about what GZ & TM did to end up where they ended up. Just assuming a typical walk speed of 4.5ft/sec, I got 48378 possible paths!!!
    OK, most of the paths calculated are ridiculous, as they consist in the person walking back and forth multiple time between two adjacent nodes. That said, it proves the 2nd point that is that it is impossible for GZ to have just walk from the east end of the cutthrough to the T. He must have done something more like waiting longer under the rain, or pacing on the cutthrough or walking around looking about..
    Actually, and that is the 3rd point, GZ likely was not at the east end of the cutthrough. He could have been so far from the T that he could have been in view of his own house according to some of the routes found.
    The last point is that GZ definitely had time to walk away. He could have been back in his truck, or at the clubhouse or even near his home just walking.

    • May 21, 2013 at 1:39 PM

      Awww.. you didnt plug in Amsterdam’s routes. She’ll be disappointed.

      This chart shows once again that “they went thataway” theories are useless. However as you say, the “I went thisaway” story by GZ seems highly improbable, and “the kid went this way” is physically impossible. Therefor he’s lying about how he arrived at the scene of a killing, and I think he’d also established a PATTERN to his lies that can be extended to explain his self-serving story of the physical altercation. Is that proof of M2? I dunno, I’m not a judge or lawyer or juror. But if I were the latter, I’d assume he was guilty and look to the judge and the prosecution for the best pathway to vote him guilty.

      .

      • amsterdam1234
        May 21, 2013 at 3:21 PM

        My route is there Willis. These are just the routes GZ could’ve taken, not Trayvon’s. But you are right they could’ve gone anywhere.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 21, 2013 at 3:30 PM

      That is fun. Can you change the variables to see how far away from his car he could’ve been when he got off the phone.

      • May 21, 2013 at 6:11 PM

        Done: http://i.imgur.com/dUp33AEh.jpg
        There are much less possibilities but the number is still north of 3000. So, same conclusion: you cannot claim that he took one route over another.
        What you can conclude is that GZ had enough time to walk significantly longer distances than he claims he did. That said, some of the routes lead to near Brandy’s back porch.
        Finally, the figure proves that GZ had a broad range of options that did not include following the kid. For example, he had plenty of options to get an address including 1950 RVC, his home, were he could have been near.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 21, 2013 at 6:52 PM

          Great,
          If it is easy to use, can you try 21 sec at running/jogging speed. That should be about twice the speed of walking. I think he did stop for a while at least. The tapping sounds lasted for about 33 sec until 3:15 into the call.

      • May 21, 2013 at 7:30 PM

        A votre service Madame: http://i.imgur.com/4q7wEzGh.jpg

        So, there are much less possible routes (only 40 assuming a pace of 9ft/sec). But, considering that he probably came into a dark area when he started banging on his flashlight then only the T and the shortcut between the 1200 TTL & 1300 TTL makes sense.

        You also have to consider that I made my virtual GZ run from where the real one claims he parked.

        • May 21, 2013 at 7:49 PM

          Another possibility that could please Willi is to assume that GZ parked near the west curve. Here is the corresponding figure: http://i.imgur.com/4yBjXMhh.jpg

        • amsterdam1234
          May 21, 2013 at 7:52 PM

          You are the best. I am surprised he didn’t make it to RVC. His car door closed 5 sec before you can hear him picking up speed. So that could be another 20 ft. But he was talking to Sean, so that would’ve limit his speed.

          I agree that those 3 spots make most sense. So we could limit his routes from those 3 points starting at 7:12:50 to the spot where the altercation began around 7:16. Of course assuming his car was parked where he said it was.

    • May 21, 2013 at 4:52 PM

      Indeed you did have fun, Tchoupi! Very colourful!

  56. May 21, 2013 at 5:02 PM

    Huh! JM just posted that Defence filed motion for Nelson to bar State’s motion to bar toxicology reports and testimony. Apparently MOM & Co want to link GZ’s “he’s on drugs or something” with Trayvon’s MJ use for which there is apparently evidence Trayvon took MJ up to Brandy’s to smoke while there and the State’s toxicologist has testified that the low amount of THC in Trayvon’s blood could be due to his being a chronic user.
    Link to motion here on GZlegal

    • May 21, 2013 at 5:27 PM

      Is that the reason why Brandy & then Tracy said on TV the days after the killing that TM was sitting at Brandy’s porch?

      • May 22, 2013 at 9:10 AM

        In the first bond hearing BDLR says that Trayvon took the most direct route home from the mail kiosk, if that’s true, he arrived there a while before gz appears? The fact that Chad calls Trayvon and asks when he’s coming back, seems to suggest that he”s planning to call Chad to open the door, because he has no key. My guess is Trayvon would not leave Chad alone in the house with the doors unlocked.

        I’ll also guess that if Trayvon suspected that he was still being followed, he would not call Chad to come open the door, because that would put them both in danger and Trayvon isn’t that kind of kid. He may be weak and scared but he’s no coward! He’s not a “save myself first” kind of guy. However gz is a “save only myself and let the devil take the hindermost”, kind of guy.

        gz has had nothing to eat and no money all day. His wife claims that she went over to her fathers to have dinner, which if true, says gz wasn’t welcomed. It also says that there was no money for the weekly shopping trip, else why would his wife be going to her fathers for dinner when they should be doing their weekly shopping?

        gz must have been going through some terrible times, no money, hungry, car being repossessed, facing eviction and, of course, that meant the loss of his job. But he was working? So where was his money going?

        As far as Trayvon smoking MJ, there’s no evidence of it. As the toxicologist says, that level of THC could just as easily be picked up, by walking through an area where people were smoking MJ. Thus it’s evidence of little to nothing.

        • May 22, 2013 at 10:02 AM

          Lonnie: “As far as Trayvon smoking MJ, there’s no evidence of it.”.

          Actually, the motion has this paragraph: “From other evidence in the case, it is known that Trayvon Martin brought marijuana with him from South Florida to use while he was in Sanford and that he used it at least one time after arriving in Sanford prior to his death.”

        • May 22, 2013 at 4:39 PM

          Yes I remember MOM alluding to his security having found someone who claimed to have sold Trayvon MJ in Miami. Nothing much came of it then and it was forgotten. But the fact remains that the toxicologist says that the amount of chemical detected could, just as easily have come from, either having smoked several days ago, or have resulted from having walked through an area where people were smoking. So those were the choices released with the report.

          There is no way to differentiate between the causes. Thus the defense will have to back up their claims with evidence. Remember neither MOM nor West can be taken at their word. They insisted, for the longest that they could win an immunity hearing, until finally, when forced to decide if they would have one or not, they waived it.

          They still insist that GZ had an “undisputed broken nose”, even though it has been disputed on several occasions and they continue to insist that Trayvon was beating gz, even though the only witness to claim he saw such a beating, has recanted that claim. So, we do know that the defense team makes claims that they cannot prove. Thus we cannot take their mere assertions to be truth. Nor anything reported by Rene Stutzman, the failed Orlando Sentinel reporter who asserts as fact things that are not either true or facts.

    • amsterdam1234
      May 21, 2013 at 6:14 PM

      According to O’Mara w6 still saw Trayvon hitting GZ mma style, I believe it when I see it. It is possible of course, although he’d be the first person I know to only buy one pack of skittles after smoking pot and then not even touching it. I don’t see how it is relevant. There is no connection between violent behavior and smoking pot.

      • May 21, 2013 at 6:28 PM

        And according to this motion, TM swayed at the 7-11 counter as if he was under the influence of some substances. After month of the videos being out, it is the 1st time I read from someone who sees TM sway as if he was high.
        Is that’s all the defense has?

        • amsterdam1234
          May 21, 2013 at 6:55 PM

          The State should have one of its audio experts, compare GZ’s slurred speech that evening, with one of his other 911/nen calls, and have them opine about that.

        • May 22, 2013 at 12:32 PM

          Perhaps he is swaying in time to music he’s listening to. Perhaps the defense is grasping at straws.

  57. May 22, 2013 at 2:10 AM

    Everyone, finally the long awaited “Defendant’s Second Supplemental Discovery” now available @GZlegalcase

    • May 22, 2013 at 2:21 AM

      Sorry link didn’t work despite several efforts but pretty sure everyone knows how to get there.

  58. May 22, 2013 at 4:24 AM

    Everyone, curious little motion also filed by defence yesterday to reduce the fee requested for his deposition by the audio expert Tom Owen, MOTION TO ESTABLISH REASONABLE EXPERT FEE

    • May 22, 2013 at 12:42 PM

      yawn. They are asking for a discount. The odd part is that it’s Tom Owen they want to testify as an expert, and he’s already gone on record saying it’s TM calling for help. That’s the part that puzzles me. Why call someone who thinks your client is a lying murderer?

      • May 22, 2013 at 2:19 PM

        That’s interesting indeed. I believe I read some times ago that GZ’s defense had their own expert contradicting the State’s experts.
        Did any one keep a tally of all the expert and their conclusions?

      • May 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM

        Yes extremely puzzling, and even though he’s on their lit they don’t know that the prosecution will actually call Owen to testify.

  59. amsterdam1234
    May 22, 2013 at 4:32 AM

    Willis and Whonoze

    Jon’s unredacted photo is part of the discovery. You can see Jon’s shadow in it.

    • May 22, 2013 at 7:45 AM

      From 2nd disclosure, photo DSC_0095 is excellent to see that the long horizontal line from which blood runs down the back of GZ’s head on Jon’s photo is not due to one long cut as some thought, but due to two separate “injuries”, i.e. one cut of around 1cm and another cut and/or abrasion separated from the first by about 1cm. A ridge on his skull probably caused blood from both wounds to join and pool and overflow in one long curtain like fall.

      • May 22, 2013 at 12:30 PM

        Take a look at the station house photos to see the extent and placement of the injuries, which are no longer bleeding a short time later.

        It’s possible to note that the injury to the left-most side of his head is slightly LOWER than the blood trail, indicating that the blood did indeed pool slightly and flow UP a tiny tiny bit before running down.

        It’s also reasonable to assume that this left handed person put his left hand back there and drew it across to check his injury. I just don’t read much of anything into the blood flow.

        To me this is an important photo because it shows him holding a cell phone to his ear trying to make a call, something he fails utterly to recall ever in his many statements. It’s evidence of his inability to keep his story straight before even his actual phone records may come into play by the prosecution.

        Unless GZ stood on his head like a yogi there is no reason for there to be any significant upward blood trails. I tend to think he was indeed on his back when he received the injuries to the rear of his head. He just wasn’t there long, and when he regained his upright position the blood ran down via gravity.

        Further, I think the photo is “real” and essentially unaltered from as it was shot.

        All of this is one person’s opinion, my own. It would be nice to form a consensus on this issue however and I remain willing to keep an open mind as to other’s opinion.

    • May 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

      I’m not sure what you see as Jon’s shadow. As far as I can tell nothing illuminated him. I do see a possible shadow of the camera/phone/Jon’s hand on the back of GZ’s collar.

      more below on this

      • amsterdam1234
        May 22, 2013 at 12:31 PM

        I thought I saw the shadow of Jon’s head and his hand with the camera next to it, on the pavement to the left of GZ’s head. Or maybe that was my Jesus apparition. 😃

        • May 22, 2013 at 5:25 PM

          gosh i dont see that at all. I see a ROUND pattern of light that is a tight circle with the center on GZ’s noggin. Darken the photo to see it. Thats the flashlight beam IMO.

  60. amsterdam1234
    May 22, 2013 at 4:46 AM

    Willis
    Here is your colored Google maps drawing

    • May 22, 2013 at 10:00 AM

      Holy cow where did you get that? Thanks so much.

      This is utterly fascinating to me and a keystone piece of evidence I believe.

      GZ marked the exact position he seems to be shown parking at in the poolhouse video, but he crossed it out as soon as he was asked to continue his narrative because IMO he realized he couldn’t admit to the car-to-pedestrian chase aspect of the real events, and so he substitutes FOR THE FIRST TIME the “TM doubled back/ circled my vehicle from the T” false narrative hoping that by blaming what he did – double back – would somehow paint the child as the aggressor.

      This map is a visual aid to HOW, WHERE and WHY GZ lied to the SPD. Each line he’s drawn here is mostly a lie, based on how GZ wishes the events had occurred.

      Note that there seems to be a line showing GZ’s path all the way past the cut thru path’s end and ACROSS RVC. GZ did not go that far in his walk thru “recreation” video. What is the explanation for this contradiction in depicting his movement? I’m guessing the defense may have some explaining to do after the prosecution presents these inconsistencies and contradictions.

      Also there seems to be a line from the T south towards John w6’s back yard that was not visible in the B+W version, so that’s something to note in his favor somewhat. Previously I had assumed he made up the “stumbling” on the spot during the recreation video but here it seems he does recall better detail than he seems to have ever explained verbally that the two ended up 40 feet south of the T. Verbally however he had no real explanation for how this occurred as he drew the map.

      Of course, such accuracy seems to fly in the face of his “amendment” of where his car was when he pinpointed it near the mail kiosk. It seems highly suspicious to me that he can’t recall where he parked his car in a neighborhood he’s patrolled for countless months. His “mistake” registers to me on the level of a nine year old being caught in an obvious self-serving lie.

      • May 22, 2013 at 10:53 AM

        Tracing the line BACK from the RVC roadway near the end of the cut thru path, if you are getting specific it seems to be the SAME continuous line GZ drew leading from the middle of RVC to almost John W6’d back yard, and it fails to go past the T at all; instead it detours more or less through the dog waste station to underneath the tree.

        One theory is that TM was standing beneath the tree waiting out the rain as GZ returned from aimlessly wandering RVC only to find TM “in the bushes” aka under the tree stationary. GZ closes the gap and the verbal exchange begins. Then the physical altercation starts somehow and includes GZ getting a tree branch in the face causing the scratches and possibly the nose injury as well.

        But that’s just speculation of course. I’m speculating however taking into account the line GZ drew, the keychain flashlight location, and the idea that TM didn’t move much past the corner once he’s run off the roadway and felt he’s lost the creepy car.

        Many things are possible. What GZ claims happened is not possible.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 22, 2013 at 11:12 AM

          It maybe worth it to listen to GZ’s interview with Singleton again. Especially the part where he is drawing.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 22, 2013 at 11:07 AM

        It is part of the defense’s second discovery in the set photos taken at FDLE.

        Jon’s original photo is also part of the discovery.

        • May 22, 2013 at 1:18 PM

          On the photo, the very dark patch on the left collar is the shadow of his ear. On the ground visible above the left shoulder seems to be a patch of light. Torchlight? otherwise same old same old…

      • amsterdam1234
        May 22, 2013 at 11:09 AM

        I knew that one would make you happy. I’ve always thought you were spot on with the chase, but it becomes very clear in this colored map, especially in combination with the clubhouse videos.

        • May 22, 2013 at 11:49 AM

          Thanks again for pointing this out as quickly as possible. I’ve been salivating to see this for over a year now. Note well that reading the markings left to right, the SECOND highlighter area seems to be where GZ is claiming he saw TM for the first time, and it is not the same spot where he points out in the “re-creation” walkthru video, but instead a few units over. Another glaring inconsistency.

          In the B+W version I couldn’t tell if that was supposed to be a car position or not, but here we see one is marked CAR and the other is not. This has to be the mark he’s making for TM’s alleged position.

          He’s so full of sh**. I’m fairly convinced he never saw TM on RVC at all and is merely conflating the earlier incident with the Taffee-window-peeper in order to have some convincing memory details to base his lies upon.

          His freudian slip about “my wife” during the recreation I credit to his being with her when the Taaffe’s window peeper incident took place, not her presence in the vehicle on the day of the killing, which I doubt highly.

          His entire self-serving false narrative is predicated upon the idea that he never once moved his car in a manner that meant he was following the teen in a moving vehicle while keeping the kid in his vision, but instead somehow was able to intuit where he should drive to after leaving the clubhouse parking lot, which makes zero sense if you think about it. Why, if his narrative were true, would he park his car at all, ever?

          He’s clearly admitted to moving his car during the NEN call. He just lies to try and re-order the positions of the two as a means to omit and obfuscate the car to pedestrian chase.

          He’s clearly marked the spot where he stopped facing the mail kiosk, and he’s clearly REALIZED while he was telling the story and marking the map that he HAS to move the real mark or else admit to a car to pedestrian chase. It’s a PATHETIC attempt at building a false narrative and it’s a see-thru as rocky mountain air.

          IMO EVERYTHING that this entire group has uncovered points to a car-to-pedestrian chase down TTL in some fashion. And everything that is inconsistent, contradictory and omitted from GZ’s narrative can be reconciled by understanding the reasons for his mendacity involve the obvious fact, confirmed by W8/Dee Dee, that GZ chased the kid with his car causing the teen to run off the roadway and then behind the buildings into the dog walk area in order to elude a STALKER.

          Yes, I’ll look at the map once again and listen to his interview with SIngleton, as I suggest EVERYONE here does, but I’m already sure of what this is all about.

          To me these are the provable lies that should be presented at trial to establish the pattern of HOW he lies. When i doubt George leaves it out; what George did he blames on the kid. Many things are possible; what George claims happened is not possible.

        • amsterdam1234
          May 22, 2013 at 6:49 PM

          I just listened to the Singleton interview again, with the map in front of me. You can hear rusty wheels turning when he moves that car on TTL.

          The spot on the map where he said he first saw Trayvon, is more than a couple of units over from the spot he gave in the walk-through.

          His car is passed the cut-through next to Taffe. He has Trayvon past the second cut-through on Oregon.

  61. May 22, 2013 at 12:14 PM

    As to the issue of W13/Jon’s photo of the bloody back of GZ’s head, it’s good to finally see a full copy presented without is having to cobble one together from video sources.

    I stick with my earlier assessment that the deep shadows obscuring his left hand are the result of the head being illuminated by the flashlight Jon is using to help focus and compose the photo. I see no alterations.

    I think the shadow across his collar and shoulders is of the phone itself, and likely the hand holding the phone/camera. The flashlight is held above the phone facing almost straight down onto the injured back of GZ’s head. The shadow falling down onto the left hand area is of his head/ear. The shadow of the cell phone falls upon his right wrist/ forearm area.

    His left blue jeans knee is visible, and he’s aprox where the tan bag was found but there is no bag visible in the photo. Perhaps the bag is still in GZ’s hand? Whonoze, indeed. Who knows?

    It’s worth noting that this still isn’t “the original” photo as far as I can tell.

  62. May 22, 2013 at 12:38 PM

    tchoupicaillou :
    Lonnie: “As far as Trayvon smoking MJ, there’s no evidence of it.”.
    Actually, the motion has this paragraph: “From other evidence in the case, it is known that Trayvon Martin brought marijuana with him from South Florida to use while he was in Sanford and that he used it at least one time after arriving in Sanford prior to his death.”

    Where is this so-called evidence? I’ve not seen it presented, and the trial is in a few short weeks.

    • May 22, 2013 at 1:40 PM

      You’ve not been following the REAL evidence trail, have you? CTH has exclusive rights on it.
      He brought it with him because that’s where he had supplies as that’s where he normally dealt. The $40 in his pocket was proceeds of a small amount he sold to the 3 stooges at 7-11. Tracy didn’t report him missing until next day, in order to have time to find and clear away evidence of the MJ from Brandi’s place. TM and his cousin got high thew day before when they were supposed to be going to the movies. Proof is also that this gave them the munchies, leading to TM cooking something at 2 a.m. In any case the tox report is proof he used sometimes in the preceding week, which is the evidence for the “…he used it at least one time after arriving in Sanford… ”

      For righteous, anti-drugs, clean-living guys, the CTH crowd seems to know an awful lot about current drug recipes and going prices……..For them this makes them experts. For a black boy, it makes him a thug.

      In the parallel universe the rest of us live in, that statement in the motion is worth about as much as all the other motions… which I can’t say on a family-friendly blog where I’ve maintained a clean name myself.

      • May 22, 2013 at 6:15 PM

        Oooops! “Family friendly blog”??? Can’t we have a watershed so I can be sure never to blot my copy book on that account before the time limit. Or even better, whonoze incorporates a Kiddies Corner. : – )

        • May 23, 2013 at 3:05 AM

          Well,. I mean we’ve tried to keep the language clean. The only obscenity mentioned is someone(s) thinking it’s okay to execute an innocent person just because you feel like it (oh and that he’s black).

        • May 23, 2013 at 4:59 AM

          : – )

    • May 22, 2013 at 2:07 PM

      I don’t know where the evidence is but I can’t imagine 1 second that the defense would refer to none existing evidences in the case to make his motion.

      Look, it is very clear that GZ’s defense is suggesting that TM was not in a normal mindset when he was shot. But doing so, the defense is forced to stretch facts to laughable levels. Sure MJ can have long term effects on consumers as presented by a state expert. But, what they are trying to say is that in spite of being below the threshold of illegality the level of TCH found in TM’s blood stream made him sway like a junky at the 7-11, and that it impaired his judgement to the point of making TM deciding to double-back and give a hard lesson to his not-even-stalker, and finally decide to simply kill him?

      I look to the size of the pot consuming population in the US and I’m like, Whaoo, pot does that!!! I’m no expert in pot. I don’t smoke, I don’t drink (not even wine which explains why no French ever tried to keep me there). However, like most, I’ve been in contact with pot smokers. Actually, the 1st time for me was with two teens from a white middle class American family from upstate NY. All that is to say that my views on the effects MJ has on the smoker is opposite to what the defense is claiming: It slows the person down. It makes him/her happier. It lowers his/her awareness.

      I can see how the defense can try justifying GZ initial suspicion but using the 7-11 is just over the top. I never saw TM sway in the 7-11 video and I still don’t although I’m sure he was a pot smoker.

      I can see how the defense can try answering to Serino’s question on what could have made TM snap. But again, I don’t see MJ turning people irritable and violent, particularly if the level is too low to be legally perceived as dangerous. Actually, TM would have snapped to what? GZ always denied doing anything that could have angered anyone.

      What I can see is how GZ’s narrative(s) fits well with him being attacked by a gangsta, a burglar, possibly a junky looking for something to steal. But, the kid had money with him, he just went to the convenient store and he was on his way home and he was on the phone all day long with friends including when he is supposed to be looking for troubles. So, GZ’s narrative simply collapsed. Comically, the defense thinks they have their way out with pot.

      • May 22, 2013 at 6:36 PM

        “I never saw TM sway in the 7-11 video and I still don’t although I’m sure he was a pot smoker.

        Wrongly or rightly, depending each persons experience, I spent my 20’s and a part of my 30’s smoking pot recreationally with friends, but I never heard, read or saw that it was typical of those who smoked pot to sway nor did I once see a fight or a brawl or any type violence caused by the practice. On the other hand I didn’t touch alcohol until well into my 40’s yet even in my early teens I was aware that people who drunk alcohol could sway and I’ve seen plenty of fights, brawls and violence caused by it.

        • May 22, 2013 at 6:38 PM

          Sorry Tchoupi, I forgot to put the “/” after the less than symbol for the last “blockquote”

        • May 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM

          We’re on the same page gb.
          I’m not sure if it’s a sign that the defense disparately needs to though the kitchen sink at TM or if it really buys into tcth’s narrative. In any cases, if their argument is that those traces of MJ in TM’s blood stream made him TM snap and go attempting murder, they’re set for a bad surprise.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 23, 2013 at 7:32 AM

        However, like most, I’ve been in contact with pot smokers. Actually, the 1st time for me was with two teens from a white middle class American family from upstate NY

        Mj use in the US s higher among white than AA and Latinos. AA’s are arrested for posession at triple the rate of whites.

        I came to the US at 21 after growing up in Amsterdam. I found drug use to be so much more prevelant in the US than back home.

        The war on drugs has prevented a good policy about drug use. There are dangers involved in mj use, like in any other substance that effects the brain chemistry including alcohol, especially for teenagers. Instead of waging a war based on false premises, good education could help teenagers to make informed choices.

    • May 22, 2013 at 6:00 PM

      I was thinking exactly the same when I read the motion… What “other evidence in this case” is it “known” that he brought MJ with him to use at Sanford… etc. It is so specific and detailed I concluded, either I’d missed that bit of evidence from one of the disclosures or MOM was disclosing, (“inadvertently” of course ; – ) ), sealed evidence.

    • May 23, 2013 at 8:46 AM

      It’s probably just another defense lie. Any such evidence would be discoverable, any testimony by a witness would be deposed. There is nothing there. It’s like MOM’s “Undisputed broken nose”, it doesn’t exist.

  63. May 22, 2013 at 12:58 PM

    tchoupicaillou :
    Another possibility that could please Willi is to assume that GZ parked near the west curve. Here is the corresponding figure: http://i.imgur.com/4yBjXMhh.jpg

    I’ve never thought GZ exited his car while parked so near the mail kiosk, but that’s amusing to look at. As I keep saying, many things are possible but what GZ claims happened is not possible. Maybe you should plot a path for TM passing GZ in the clubhouse parking lot and attempting to teleport to the dog walk seconds after, lol.

    Please weigh in on the map GZ drew on for Singleton. It’s a bombshell as I always thought it would be. Lots to ponder and discuss for those who want to speculate on “they went thataway,” which is as you have shown, endlessly possible to speculate upon.

  64. May 22, 2013 at 8:08 PM

    amsterdam1234 :
    I just listened to the Singleton interview again, with the map in front of me. You can hear rusty wheels turning when he moves that car on TTL.
    The spot on the map where he said he first saw Trayvon, is more than a couple of units over from the spot he gave in the walk-through.
    His car is passed the cut-through next to Taffe. He has Trayvon past the second cut-through on Oregon.

    I’m listening again to the interviews with Singleton. In the 1st interview, at ~20:50, GZ draws the scene and says “I parked my car here”. Did anyone saw that drawing?

    • May 22, 2013 at 8:36 PM

      A comments comments GZ made during those interviews:
      – When TM passed his car the 1st time the engine was running so TM knew he was in,
      – When he exited his car to look for an address, the engine was not running.
      – When asked if he could see TM disappearing behind the buildings while in front of the clubhouse he says “yes”.
      – When asked if he could see where TM went after circling his car, he says “no”.

      One observation is that it took GZ a little while before realizing that his truck may have been parked further east.

      I confirm that in that 2nd interview TM is not at Taafee’s house while at the first interview minutes earlier TM is at Taafee’s.

      • May 23, 2013 at 9:13 AM

        “When he exited his car to “look for an address” he wasn’t exiting his car to look for an address. This was a few very short seconds after he exclaimed, “sh**, he’s running,” and although it’s rather obvious he is exiting the vehicle to hurry after the teen, not ONCE did he ever volunteer the information to the SPD that the teen ran away from him. He ONLY speaks of it when prompted, and then is vague and “unsure” about the incident. He’s a self serving liar who attempted to omit this information from his account, and but for the NEN call recording, the SPD would never have known that TM ran at all.

        And if he killed the engine he still MAY have left the keys in hoping that would keep the headlights on longer. We don’t know.

        “When asked if he could see TM disappearing behind the buildings while in front of the clubhouse he says yes.”

        He’s lying about being in the clubhouse parking lot, and attempting to describe TM’s movements in a way that obscures and omits the car-to-pedestrian chase. I give zero merit to this statement since it’s a lie. But in theory he’s referring to where the line he drew on the map trails off halfway down TTL as it leads down the grass behind the building that faces RVC on the way to the cut thru. HIs omission of the line from there to the dog walk area is a deliberate ommission of the line that would trace the path TM RAN to get away from his moving vehicle.

        “When asked if he could see where TM went after circling his car, he says no.”

        Another lie. However, he may be referring to the fact that he could not tell if TM went into the dog walk area or continued on towards RVC as he ran away and GZ scrambled to exit his vehicle. IMO he missed that detail and this is why he may have passed the T without seeing the teen in the grass somewhere south of the T.

        “One observation is that it took GZ a little while before realizing that his truck may have been parked further east.”

        Yes and that pause corresponds with the realization that SIngleton is going to continue to question his movements step by step. After the pause he tells the clear lie about TM “doubling back/ circling the vehicle” for the first time. IMO this description is a substitution for what GZ did, which is to double back himself and instigate a car-to-pedestrian chase where it’s possible he himself may have caused the teen to be first on one side of his vehicle and then the other.

        Like Amsterdam says, it almsot as if you could hear the wheels turning inside his head at this juncture because he is telling a flat-out lie and hoping he can get away with it at this point.

        “I confirm that in that 2nd interview TM is not at Taafee’s house while at the first interview minutes earlier TM is at Taafee’s.”

        Exactly. He’s conflating the story of the window-peeper to provide some plausible detail but he is LYING.

        • May 23, 2013 at 9:49 AM

          Willi: “And if he killed the engine he still MAY have left the keys in hoping that would keep the headlights on longer. We don’t know.”

          Actually we know. The car chimes we can hear when GZ opens the driver’s side door clear warns about the keys being off the ignition and the lights being either on “on” or on “park”.

          ###
          Willi: “He’s lying about being in the clubhouse parking lot…”

          This is an obvious lie as images we have accumulated in the past year clear show that you cannot see TTL from the parking lot except for the part that’s right at the junction with RVC.

          ###
          Willi: “Another lie. However, he may be referring to the fact that he could not tell if TM went into the dog walk area or continued on towards RVC as he ran away and GZ scrambled to exit his vehicle.”

          This is not a “maybe”. He is clearly answering that no to whether he makes the turn [down the dogwalk I have to guess] or continues. Then he says that he cannot see him. This is a contradiction with the reenactment done less than 24hours later.

          ###
          Willi: “Yes and that pause corresponds with the realization that SIngleton is going to continue to question his movements step by step.”

          That was not a pause. He is describing where he parked for a little while. He even uses terms like “Right here”. He makes multiple affirmations like “yes madam.”. It is only after Singleton asks about TM coming back to circle his car that he suddenly express a doubt with “It might have been closer in between…”.
          Besides the fact that he probably stopped at the initial location, it is interesting to note his ability to have an assertive ton to say something he will contradict later on.

        • unitron
          May 23, 2013 at 10:02 AM

          Are you quite sure he says “madam” and not “ma’am”?

    • May 22, 2013 at 10:55 PM

      Perhaps “I parked my car here” was just hand gestures or him pointing at a computer screen. I havent re-listened to the tape however. It’s after the break and into the second recording that she returns specifically for the purpose of using the map she printed and he drew on. I assume the highlighter pen marks are hers.

      • May 23, 2013 at 9:59 AM

        GZ actually draw a map and explained the action on that map.
        I understand that nobody herevsaw that drawing. Apparently, there are still evidences in there that need to come out.

        • May 23, 2013 at 10:54 PM

          We had this map long ago, Tchoupi. But it was a smeared photocopy, on which you could barely make out the spots he’d marked for the car; the pedestrian markings were invisible. They’re not too good even on this version.

        • May 24, 2013 at 12:52 AM

          I understand you are speaking about a hand-drawn map separate from the one printed out from google maps. But I’m guessing that Singleton decided that the google maps one superseded the earlier one, which may have been too crude to understand anyways. It also would seem logical that if GZ drew a map that differed from the one he marked soon after that Singleton would see fit to keep the earlier one as evidence of an inconsistent suspect’s tale.

          But yeah, we should have seen it anyways. Heaven knows they kept a ton of lesser documents.

  65. May 22, 2013 at 10:47 PM

    @whonoze and everyone

    Don’t know if you have seen this curious video by PrimeauForensics, uploaded a week ago. It’s not an analysis rather an explanation of what to expect and counterpoising GZ’s exemplars with some of the screams for help but without an opinion. It may just be a publicity stunt taking advantage that everyone is talking about audio experts just now.

    In his commentary he notes analysts will be preparing similar for trial. Could there be more analysis from other experts still to be released or is it two late for that?

  66. May 23, 2013 at 2:17 PM
    • May 23, 2013 at 2:33 PM

      TM was headed in the wrong way of life reading at the portion of texts selected by the Defense.

      • May 23, 2013 at 4:18 PM

        Hmmm. Just writing some first thoughts after glancing through the 3rd disclosure in case anyone’s interested or for somebody to refute and lift my concerns.

        Not very positive stuff there for the prosecution unfortunately. A cursory look over at the lounge and it according to the professor Nelson will/should bar much of it, which would be good but even if she does the damage may already be done unless jury instructions are strictly to only take in what happened that night. Certainly texts about hitting a teacher, even if alleged, fights, and replies such as “why ya always fighting” or something similar (I don’t know how to write that type of text), along with talk about guns and “gansta”, even if just messing around could be damaging at the best of times with a deep white jury if the Joe Horn’s is anything to go by.

        One sees the defence strategy clearly from the disclosure; the texts selected speak for themselves, the animal reports to show why GZ needed a gun and perhaps to show bias of a witness, the photos of witness 25 to show bias and one of a kind, the tweet to show the good job GZ was doing running the NW, the Clayton stuff to show what a good man GZ is, the video of witness 14 to impeach the kid Austin, and etc. etc.

        I never thought Trayvon to be a saint and I think some at the lounge were erring too much in that direction since last winter, but I have to admit I wasn’t expecting quite as much as this… but then hopefully it’s just one of my doom and gloom days!

        • wassointeresting
          May 23, 2013 at 6:57 PM

          Take a deep breath. Put it in perspective. We all knew TM was no saint, but the “shock” in us right now I’m afraid is that hidden “racist” in all of us. Just think how NOT shocked we’d be if TM were a white kid talking about taking karate lessons or boxing lessons at the YMCA. Or if there was a picture of him with a hunting rifle and a moose head on the wall? Or instead of gold grills, he had a mouth full of gold capped molars from drinking too much mountain dew?

      • May 24, 2013 at 6:26 AM

        I don’t see this as Trayvon’s personality, it doesn’t fit. What it does fit is TCTH wish list. Because it is still just prejudicial and none of it is probative or material. gz cannot claim that it was alright to follow Trayvon because he knew he was a thug, because there are laws against him doing that, because he hasn’t the authority to interfere with anyone’s movements, whether they lived in RATL or not.

    • May 23, 2013 at 3:07 PM

      Thx tchoupi.

  67. Gracie
    May 23, 2013 at 5:39 PM

    Hi. I am new here. I quit following this case (except sporadically) about eight months ago. Can anyone explain to me why the white embroidery on the back of GZ’s jeans isn’t dirty if he was laying on his back in the wet grass and mud? Supposedly he was wiggling, shimmeying, or whatever else you want to call it … So where is the dirt? The back of his pants looks so clean.

    • May 23, 2013 at 8:33 PM

      Hi gracie. Not being the blog owner I can only welcome you as a fellow blogger. As to your question:

      Can anyone explain to me why the white embroidery on the back of GZ’s jeans isn’t dirty if he was laying on his back in the wet grass and mud?

      I posted a similar challenge over at http://www.frederickleatherman.com (Professor Leatherman’s law blog, here often referred to as “the lounge”) especially as the knee areas of Trayvon’s slacks definitely appear dirty and mud streaked even if lightly. Amsterdam1234 came back with the idea that Trayvon could be on his knees, which fits with my, and that of amsterdam, aussie and I think probably most of those here, long held views that GZ had Trayvon in some kind of restraining hold (wrist, arm or shoulder lock) which was what I have since near dot felt had to be the reason for the excruciating physical pain demonstrated with some of the screams.

      • Gracie
        May 23, 2013 at 9:05 PM

        Trayvon’s knees look a little dirty but it appears that there is more dirt near the inseam — which is something I can’t explain. And that white embroidery is so clean, you can’t tell me that person was flat on their back.

        I’d also like to know about those two big chunks cut out of Trayvon’s shirt and sweatshirt… Wonder what was on them?

        • May 25, 2013 at 10:03 AM

          The white “lace” does look clean but then it is a mature several cm thick matted lawn, like we have in the UK, it would only get wet not muddy unless grass and soil are “punctured” by pressure from a “sharp” body point, e.g. knee, elbow, toe. The streaking near the inseam could be due to going from knees down to on his side, or from GZ’s shoes?

          For the large sections of Trayvon’s top wear cut out, bot interestingly at the back, I have been trying to find the discovery docs that include photos of the garments to no success. I am sure Tchoupi will know because on his site,

          http://imgur.com/a/bcAII#BYPzybJ

          where he keeps all his analysis of the lights, blood, route etc., he has some/all garment pics and Trayvon’s curiously don’t show these cut outs so it they must have been done after. I thought maybe the defence took the cut outs for testing but then why they take the photos after cutting them out… doesn’t make sense.

          Maybe Tchoupi or others here will either know or have some ideas on why the cut outs and what for as the are from the back… could it be to test if he was on his back during the struggle at all?

  68. May 23, 2013 at 7:30 PM

    wassointeresting :
    Take a deep breath. Put it in perspective. We all knew TM was no saint, but the “shock” in us right now I’m afraid is that hidden “racist” in all of us. Just think how NOT shocked we’d be if TM were a white kid talking about taking karate lessons or boxing lessons at the YMCA. Or if there was a picture of him with a hunting rifle and a moose head on the wall? Or instead of gold grills, he had a mouth full of gold capped molars from drinking too much mountain dew?

    WSI, I took a deep breath and looked at it again. I see no other conclusion but TM’s life drifting toward the worst. It is as simple as that.

    Does it mean that GZ is innocent of any wrong doing? Obviously no. His lies are way to big for me to ignore. But in the end, I looks like there is no good guy in this story.

    • wassointeresting
      May 23, 2013 at 10:39 PM

      “No good guys”? But not entirely bad either. We’ll never know what TM might have become. On a different note, did you notice the last text to TM was at 7:08 on the nite of the shooting. that was unread. It was redacted! I have to assume that it was DeeDee’s text to TM. Does that fit in with the timeline you guys (meaning the bcclist diaspora collective?) have been working on?

      • May 23, 2013 at 11:59 PM

        I don’t know about the 7:08 text. DeeDee’s texts in different reports are labelled “W8”. He was on the phone with her. Someone else must have text him.

  69. May 23, 2013 at 10:54 PM

    I’m not the slightest bit surprised about the text messages referencing weed, and handguns, etc. It’s got little to nothing to do with the case at hand and it’s doubtful a jury will hear much of it either. The facts are that Trayvon was a minor returning home from the store with snacks when he was profiled and pursued by a man who shot him dead when the teenager was unarmed and minding his own business. This person then lied to the police about his actions and is claiming he killed the unarmed kid in self defense, when it seems extremely likely that he did not.

    As for him being a kid “drifting towards the worst” I seriously doubt that. He had a loving mother and father and friends who cared about him, and he respected his parents and was attending school and not a dropout. There are a lot worse things that a kid can do besides smoke marijuana and TALK about handguns, especially if the kid is 17 in Miami Florida and a member of a minority. Our nation is awash in handguns and gun culture is deeply embedded into the lives of at-risk kids. I would have been MORE surprised if I had learned he knew nothing about guns and didn’t want one.

    Get real.

    If you are interested in a sociological sense in knowing what it’s like to be a kid like Trayvon may have been, I suggest listening to a recent two part episode of THIS AMERICAN LIFE, a great radio program that has free podcasts of their show produced out of WBEZ in Chicago. It’s a year long report on a rather randomly chosen High School in Chicago called Harper High. These kids are surrounded by a culture of neglect, violence and poverty and are all coping the best they can. They’ve seen and been exposed to a life that is a lot tougher than most. And their world is FLOODED with handguns, sadly. But it’s not because they chose to be in gangs or deal drugs or are out committing violent crimes. It’s just the way things are. Most feign a wealth of knowledge about guns and brag they have access to handguns but there is no way to tell which are being truthful and which are bluffing to save face in a culture that values machismo and inside knowledge about gun culture. People have a certain capacity for violence and no one who knew Travon Martin claims he was a violent type. He seemed to be a normal kid in a great many ways to me. I’m not going to claim I know much at all about him from reading a few days worth of text messages however.

    • May 23, 2013 at 11:54 PM

      Have you seen it all? TM had a Smith and Wesson in hand. Some of his text were about purchasing a caliber 38 or 22. He looks like while in Sanford, he was trying to get the money for a gun. Sure he was on the wrong path.

      I feel really sad for his parents. The true story is that they sent him to Sanford to cut get him away from Miami. There was apparently texts indicating that month before, there was some kind of decision to move him to his father.

      The kid was troubled. Definitely troubled.

      • ada4750
        May 24, 2013 at 12:15 AM

        tchoupi, How do you know it is Trayvon’s hands?

        • May 24, 2013 at 12:55 AM

          It is his phone!
          I’ve always said that TM was not an angel but I never came close to thinking what Isaw from his phone was possible.
          It is him having a gun. It is as simple as that.
          The same way GZ lies are made obvious by the time between the end of the call and the 1st 911, Tm’s side of the story is nor all clean

        • ada4750
          May 24, 2013 at 1:16 AM

          tchoupi, Good chance right. But there is no proof. Anyway, it was not his gun. So it is only slightly harmful.

          The prosecution needs to show that Trayvon was scared of GZ. Of course, the NEN call is an indication. But who is the best for that? Yes, W8. Sorry to mention her. I know she became taboo.

      • May 24, 2013 at 12:45 AM

        I don’t doubt he was seriously at risk. But to say he was drifting towards “the worst” is not accurate, I feel. “The worst” is when you feel you have the right to kill someone, lie about it, and accept and solicit blood money and remain unrepentant.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 24, 2013 at 2:22 AM

        Tchoupi,

        Why do you assume that if Trayvon liked guns, he was heading in the wrong direction?
        GZ walks around with a gun, they market “my first gun” to 5 and 6 year olds. Remember the NRA thinks you should start out early.
        Why is it that if a dude like GZ, who has a record for assaulting a police officer and domestic violence, who wrote this on his Myspace page

        Im still free! The ex hoe tried her hardest, but the judge saw through it!

        2 felonies dropped to 1 misdemeanor!!!!!!!!!!! The man knows he was wrong but still got this hump, Thanks to everyone friends and fam, G baby you know your my rock!

        oh yea, my lil sista hits like a grown MOTHER FUCKIN MAN!!!!

        nobody suggests he is a thug, but if a black teen who just turned 17, thought it was cool to take a picture of a hand holding a gun, he is on his way to become a gangster?

        The fear for black men runs deep even if we don’t want to think that way. Are minds are poisened with this kind of bigotry.

        I hate the gun worshipping culture. That it is a sign of manhood, a “God given” American right, to own a gun.

        If this was a white teenager talking about different guns with his peers gun forum, everybody would just think “the kid likes guns”. Why should there be a different standard for a black kid?

        By the way, .380 refers to dope, not a gun.

        • May 24, 2013 at 8:59 AM

          I tend to think that .380 is a reference to a lighter 9mm round. It refers to how much black powder is inside the bullet itself. To a kid like Trayvon however it’s a type of gun, and one he likely doesn’t know much about since he’s using the terminology wrong anyways.

          Kids like TM love to speak about guns and ammo in specific terms even when they do not know what the hell they are really talking about. Most discover guns in the homes of family and friends, and as we see, think that getting to hold one in their hand is a special enough occasion that it’s worth bragging about, or taking a photo of. While there is no such thing as a “.380 pistol” there are 9mm pistols that commonly use a .380 round and these are often concealed carry guns.

          Kids who are mostly ignorant about guns but fascinated by the culture and lingo think the most desirable gun is a “thirty,” by which they mean a handgun or more likely an assault rifle with a thirty round clip. They won’t say, “an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle with a fold-down stock and pistol grip with a 30 round clip” because they haven’t the slightest idea what they are truly talking about. The lingo is picked up second or third hand and distorted through empty braggadocio and ignorance beyond a clear meaning often. As a kid to draw you are picture of a “thirty” and they will draw a handgun most likely, even though most adults know the current controversy regarding 30 round clips is in reference to assault rifle magazines.

          The rare few who have actually ever fired a weapon are notoriously poor shots and so favor huge clips so that there is a better chance that they might accidentally hit what they are aiming at. But few to none ever gain proficiency with any weapon ever. They don’t hunt, they don’t go to gun ranges and they don’t have access to ammunition in order to practice and they don’t have access to privately owned land in the countryside to practice, either.

          Again, that episode of the radio documentary program THIS AMERICAN LIFE centered on Chicago’s Harper High School is a real eye-opener and I’d recommend it to anyone who is surprised by these text messages and needs some context to place this teenage bravado within.

          Keep in mind that violent video games are chock full of context-free, often casually read-references to gun identification facts that teenagers pick up in passing and pretend they understand. My six year old comes home from playdates in the neighborhood with “gun facts” all the time. He thinks the phrase “a sniper” refers to a specific weapon, not the person with a rifle hunting human beings. He can rattle off the names of half a dozen factoids about guns just because a huge component of video games is how you “set up a character” and decide which “blaster” they carry but he doesn’t know the fantasy weapons from the real ones and this is why it’s so frightening to be a parent these days. No matter how much you shelter them at home from violence, they see and hear about it constantly from television and video games even if you don’t allow it in your own home. My son was four on a road trip when we puled over for a bathroom break at a McDonald’s, a place he STILL has never eaten at as he begins HIgh School. As we passed the golden arches he said, “this is my favorite restaurant.” TV commercials trump parenting every time.

          The USA has a serious love affair with guns and it’s not going away anytime soon. There’s an old quote sometimes attributed to Mark Twain that to a boy with a hammer, the whole world soon starts looking like a nail. We in the USA are arming up a NON civil society who then walks about every day secretly hoping for the chance at a “good shoot” as the cops called it in Sanford when a lying axxhole called an unarmed kid the same and then shot him to death for no good reason after pursuing him with his car and on foot for the “crime” of walking while black.

          Sadly, GZ is the one who acted upon this love affair in a serious, day-to-day fashion. He is the one who got what he wanted. And we as a society are reaping what we sow.

          Note that the phrase “gangsta” means almost nothing to high school kids except possibly how you dress or what music you like and whether you self-identify as a member of a clique that almost decidedly is NOT a member of the sort of street gang you might imagine from watching television. Those kids quit school long ago and do not live with their parents and obey their wishes.

          If TM were some sort of a “drug dealer” why is he so excited to possess ANY small amount of weed that he needs to brag about it? He’s a casual user, like millions of Americans who ENJOY the peaceful effects of marijuana, a plant that grows in the ground.

        • May 24, 2013 at 9:17 AM

          Someone on the Leatherman blog site pointed out that a popular song by Nikki Minaj called “Bottom’s Up” that references “a .380” and that the song also has reference to a person named Trey and/or Slim. It’s likely Trayvon identified with a song like this, which is a typical rap bagging song about how many women, cars and guns the “singer” has and how much sexual prowess he and his friends enjoy. When I was a kid we had the same music only it was by Led Zeppelin.

          These sort of places are where kids pick up their “knowledge” about guns.

          Kids are ignorant and stupid, often willfully so. Adults are supposed to try to educate and protect them from this, as Tracy Martin was trying to do, and as Sabrina Fulton was hoping to have happen by getting Trayvon away from the culture in Miami he was surrounded with. Instead another type of ignorance seems to have contributed to his death at the hands of a racist idiot/ sociopath.

        • May 24, 2013 at 9:24 AM

          Amsterdam,

          My views on GZ have not budge a iota. What changed is that I now put TM & GZ in the same league.

          Sure GZ has his own problems and it is interesting that he had a very bad period at about the time he turned adult. So, I agree that TM may have just been through the same troubled transition and giving him time to grow may have fixed it.

          I don’t pre-judge what future TM may have had. I just realize that his parents were working on trying to fix what they perceived as serious enough issues to plan on moving him to a new town. DeeDee was trying to fix some of it too. I see texts where she repeatedly ask him to stay out of troubles. Yes, I know that the teen age period can be troublesome to many and that most come out of it. Like most parents, I myself cross fingers that my kids will go through it smoothly.

          No, I’m not of the kind to state that he was a thug because he was black with a gun. The fact that he was a black kid who adopted some specific AA urban culture does not impress me a bit. I’ not of the kind to use W25’s picture of himself showing his muscular naked torso to suggest he was a gangsta. If that’s what is suggested then GZ’s defense flirts with racism in this instance. The truth is that no one saw a gangsta in the similar pictures of house representative Weiner (D-NY).

          In the end, TM was fantasizing about having a gun without his parents knowing. He knew peoples with guns and he was dealing with them to get one. To my eyes, that puts him in the same league as GZ. Plus, the fact that gun is a big part of the american culture is not an excuse to me. It is a problem.

          Thanks for correcting me on the 38.

  70. May 24, 2013 at 10:59 AM

    tchoupicaillou :

    Have you seen it all?

    No, but neither have you. Keep in mind that that the text messages released by the Defense have been cherry-picked to present the worst possible view of Trayvon. Kids text a lot, We have no idea what percentage of TM’s texts concerned his ‘gansta’ posturing, nor what kind of persona may have been revealed in the other texts. So we literally have text without context.

    • May 24, 2013 at 4:43 PM

      good point. And let me keep reminding everyone, guns and gun violence are an ocean kids have to swim in these days if they live in certain places. Don’t blame them if they get wet. It’s easy to criticize from a middle class perspective but it’s entirely another thing to grow up in the middle of an impossible situation. When Trayvon Martin was born America was already at warlike society as far as gun ownership and gun-love was concerned. He was four years old when the Columbine Massacre occurred. Think about that.

    • ada4750
      May 24, 2013 at 5:24 PM

      I don’t understand this new buzz. Nothing so exceptional in Trayvon’s behavior. For example, at the same age, we used to organize boxing fights with gloves. I don’t recommend this because it was more dangerous than we thought. Smoking grass was very common and so on. No gun around though.

      Even barely seventeen, Trayvon looked strong enough to give a minimum resistance against GZ. But that was already accepted. GZ’s injuries were not made by Angel Gabriel.

      We must stay focused on the assumption that GZ pursued Trayvon through. This point settles almost certainly his culpability.

      Something about DeeDee. I think the texts she made to Trayvon reduce nearly to zero the possibility that she encouraged Trayvon to confronted GZ, like many pretended.

      ————-

      I don’t see any reference to the ClubHouse videos from the prosecution or defense. This worries me.

      • May 24, 2013 at 8:30 PM

        Again, I did not change opinion concerning GZ. I changed on TM as he was in fact far off the limits of what I consider as acceptable.

        Again, I know GZ tries hard to hide the fact that he chased TM and to my views the recorded NEN call and the time gap between that call and the confrontation just prove it.

        I agree that the clubhouse videos could help the prosecution but it looks like they are not willing to go there. It would have taken a few hours of work to reproduce the images caught by the cameras and show the two main points that are that GZ never parked by the clubhouse and actually stopped 10sec by the mailboxes right before placing his call. That would have been nice to illustrate GZ’s attempt to hide the fact that he stalked TM.

        With what the defense team has in hand now, I won’t bet on a conviction of GZ.

    • May 24, 2013 at 8:48 PM

      I perfectly understand that the defense has edited the texts leaving out what makes TM look as bad as possible to the public. However, I cannot tell if what was edited out is good or bad or neutral. All I can say is that what is on that phone can only help GZ getting out of the mess he created.

      And this time he won’t have to brag on myspace as Amsterdam shows above. I will just have to write a book.

      • May 24, 2013 at 10:54 PM

        Tchoupi, you don’t read the Lounge, do you? there’s a lot of nonsense there, but the Professor’s introductions are firmly grounded in the law. It’s real law, real knowledge, and he often quotes the actual clauses.

        What’s on that phone wont help GZ at all, because it is not admissible as evidence. O’Mara is only putting it about to influence the jury pool. It is not admissible because it shows nothing about Trayvon’s history being a violent one. If there were witnesses (or criminal records) to say he attacked people without provocation, that may go a tiny way towards showing that he may have done so this time, too. Or if there’s a text saying he’s going to attack the guy following him (or even just that he’s going to teach him a lesson) that would be admissible, too.

        However…. if defence starts to bring in character “evidence” like this, then the prosecution is allowed to, too — and GZ is the one who does have previous arrests and other history of attacking people. So that’s a door the defence won’t want to open.

        The only admissible and useful evidence from the phone would be the GPS records, if there are any.

        So cheer up; GZ can’t get out of this.

      • amsterdam1234
        May 25, 2013 at 9:29 AM

        Tchoupi

        Those extracts are collated in a very deceptive way. If you use the first report as a bases, and check date and time of messages that appear on other reports, you”ll see what I mean.
        Report 2, 3 and 6 have the column for sender/receiver blacked out, so unless it is clear from the messages itself, you can’t tell which texts are from Trayvon.
        If you look at report 2, these are texts from 11/7/11. So there is an exchange where one person says he is suspended from school for fighting.

        The SPD did a victimology on Trayvon. We know what they dug up, because it was leaked. Graffiti, the screwdriver aka ” the burglary tool”, tardyness, suspension for marijuana posession.

        There was nothing on Trayvon being suspended for fighting just a couple of months earlier.

        I don’t expect Trayvon to be squeeky clean, but I don’t trust West and O’Mara to play it clean either.

  71. May 25, 2013 at 6:53 AM

    @aussiekay, Tchoupi and everyone interesting little interview on news4jax with Cory about the release of Trayvon’s texts, pics, etc. (no idea if it will post as link or video so here goes!)

    http://www.news4jax.com/news/trayvon-martin-pics-texts-released/-/475880/20283142/-/n4gugvz/-/index.html

    • May 25, 2013 at 12:15 PM

      The li I worked for me only iPhone. Thanks.

      Corey essentially said nothing but she said nothing rather well. Sometimes this case reminds me of how poor a public speaker George Bush was and how after a few months of his presidency one sort of hit used to it, but then someone would ask Bill Clinton a question and he’d rattle off an ff the cuff response that seemed so much more coherent than the then current president was capable of presenting even when he prepared. Context aside MOM and West aren’t able to form convicting rhetoric as often as BDLR or as we see Corey do here. They just don’t have as much to work with in the first place and secondly they don’t seemed as skilled at criminal law in general, IMO.

  72. May 25, 2013 at 7:10 AM

    sorry to trouble you whonoze, but any chance of Diaspora10 as, don’t know about the rest, but loading is getting a bit slow for me now and iirc you generally start a new one at around 300 posts.

    • wassointeresting
      May 25, 2013 at 7:20 AM

      In case you guys have missed it, NLME just posted a new thread on bcclist. We’ve already been discussing the latest stuff here, but just FYI if you guys want to pop back over and say “hi” to NLME.

  73. May 25, 2013 at 12:31 PM
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s