Home > Uncategorized > BCCList Diaspora: Trial thread 1

BCCList Diaspora: Trial thread 1

I think we can safely say now that there will be no “justice for Trayvon Martin.” George Zimmerman may or may not be convicted, but it seems clear that the buck will stop with him, regardless. Wolfinger, Lee, Smith and the rest of the LEO who were more than willing to fudge their “investigation” to support the idea that GZ “made a good shoot” clearly seem to be off the hook. As far as Zimmerman’s trial is concerned, we’ve seen no sign yet that the State has gone deep enough into the evidence to be able to present the kinds of information we’ve dug up here and on the original BCCList. Just one example: nobody bothered to ask Sean Noffke what GZ was saying during the sections of the 311 recording where GZ’s words are made inaudible by crosstalk. And as Willis noted, the State’s opening statement did not mention the clubhouse videos, GZ’s map, the car to pedestrian chase, the blatant impossibilties of GZ’s “re-enactment,” etc. etc.

In better news today: the National Zoo found the Red Panda that had escaped from his exhibit. The little guy is safe and sound, and no longer in danger of rumbling with the DC tree squirrels.  Yaaay!

Blog away, gang…

 

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. unitron
    June 24, 2013 at 9:26 PM

    Those squirrels have been dealing with politicians for over 2 centuries.

    That panda wouldn’t have stood a chance.

    • June 24, 2013 at 10:48 PM

      Hmm. Red Pandas are related to skunks and weasels, active after dark and largely sedentary during the day. Rusty may have been looking for a family reunion with Michelle Bachmann, or maybe a job on K street. Whoops, no, “The species is generally quiet except for some twittering, tweeting, and whistling communication sounds.” #redpanda = shut the fuck up.

  2. June 24, 2013 at 9:39 PM

    I think and hope it is still possible that the state is holding back the big guns for the rebuttal phase and hoping to draw out the defense into some spectacular FAIL during the late phase of the trial.

    But yeah, what you said may be true. Maybe the state just doesn’t freaking get it.

    I also think there might be some gamesmanship over the defense KNOWING or suspecting this strategy and trying to draw the state out into presenting their “best evidence” up first so they can craft a defense to it.

    • June 24, 2013 at 11:07 PM

      BDLR doesn’t strike me as a cool strategist, hold-back-the-big-guns kind of guy. He strikes me as more of the bulldog, full frontal assault with everything you’ve got sort.

      We shall see.

      Maybe Ed Snowden or Julian Assange have some real dirt on GZ and it will show up on Wikileaks… 😉

  3. June 24, 2013 at 10:32 PM

    yeah i think he skipped a lot of things, but it’s early. and what about gz’s phone records??
    i’ll be really freaked out if judge rules against those other 911 calls tomorrow!
    if she does that i might be joining the NBP myself!!!

    • June 24, 2013 at 10:51 PM

      I’m not sure the NBP is organized enough to deal with one actual member.

  4. June 24, 2013 at 10:52 PM

    I don’t believe there is any big gun here.

    Nobody is going to bring in the clubhouse videos. There will be no gps data from GZ. And, I’ll cry when the prosecution will bring Wit #2 to tell to the jury the she saw a chase, or she just heard it, and it may have been just one….

    I keep hope that the prosecution team will keep on being better than the defense. But, I have to admit is that all they have to do is plant in the jury’s mind doubt about what the State just said as they did today. They were bad orators. But, they had a rebuttal each time.

    Without any big new evidence/witness, I kind of see the states case as being:
    1) GZ’s frustration with kids coming in to burglarize. This is where the battle stands right now.
    2) GZ had no intention on letting that guy going away as shown by GZ’s sudden change of mind at the end of the NEN combined with the 2 minutes gap between the end of the NEN call and the end of DD’s call (7:15:43pm) combined with having 2 flashlights & 1 gun.
    3) GZ was not massacred as evidenced by the absence of major wounds, the absence of defense wound, the absence of punching evidence on TM’s hands, and John Good’s stating that he saw and heard no punching or head bashing and he saw TM laying horizontally on GZ i.s.o straddling like in a MMA opsition.
    4) GZ had a choice not to kill TM. He actually had a choice to just wait for police. But, more specifically, during that fight, he did not have to shoot him in the hart. hat was Guy’s most powerful comment.
    5) GZ is THE Lie artist. So, don’t believe any word coming from defense.

    Do I miss anything?

    • wassointeresting
      June 25, 2013 at 2:01 AM

      Amazingly, West mentioned that TM had time to go home and back up to the T several times (I hear echoes of treeper talk every time he speaks), but did not and suggested that he instead waited up by the T to assault GZ. This will come back to bite him because what was GZ doing all that time? I am very curious as to how both sides are putting this time line together.

    • June 25, 2013 at 8:14 AM

      Agreed tchoupi. For me the most worrying, if I understand self defence law correctly in respect of an aggressor being allowed self defence if in reasonable fear of life or serious bodily harm, is that all they have to do as you note is plant a reasonable doubt and IMO they certainly sowed several seeds yesterday, especially when West referred to their medical expert who will comment the “bumps” on GZ’s head as being typical of a head meeting concrete, as well as dramatically referring to Trayvon being armed with a “concrete weapon”. IMO this is exactly where they are going to go, i.e. that even apparently unimportant blunt traumas to the head can be fatal (there are recent celebrity examples of this). On the other hand it appears to me the State will basically have to show that GZ AND his story are so unbelievable that they the jury cannot find a reasonable doubt, unless the State has another trick up its sleeve… I hope.

    • June 25, 2013 at 8:16 AM

      BTW at this stage, seeing how the defence yesterday raised doubts about everything the State will argue in their opening, I would be really happy just with a manslaughter verdict.

      • ada4750
        June 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM

        More than that, if the prosecution won’t show more meat, i will have to agree with prof Dershowitz. The prosecution did overcharged hoping a manslaughter plea. I am saying that from the beginning . The second order murder applies only if GZ was not under Trayvon when he shot. Otherwise, it is manslaughter and only if he confronted Trayvon. And it looks like they don’t have any proof that GZ was not under Trayvon.

        • June 25, 2013 at 11:20 AM

          ASA Guy was very unspecific in his opening as to what forensic evidence he had but made a point to speak about the straight-in path of the bullet. He’s going somewhere with this, but is holding back the exact strategy here, and i felt it was on purpose. I have some hope the state has a bombshell somewhere to drop onto the defense that we haven’t fully discerned. But i’m being optinistic based on little clues like this.

          They’ve kept consistent that their case is “profiled, pursued and confronted.” But they won’t yet give away how they intend to prove BARD all three elements. Not in opening, and not in discovery. They intend to keep the defense on their toes and I suspect they want to hold some things back for rebuttal to catch the defense off-guard. Everything the defense KNOWS the prosecution will allege, they have A defense for. Some of these defenses are “wafer-thin,” and gastronimically as appealing, but they are there to sow doubt and confusion nonetheless. The state needs to hit them with something they have no defense for.

          We all heard the SPD do this to GZ when they played him the NEN call and Singleton kept asking him, “are you still by the clubhouse?” and GZ grew silent and sullen. The state needs to create a repeat of this episode somehow for the jury to witness LIVE.

    • June 25, 2013 at 10:21 AM

      I hope you missed something the state can and will present, but we don’t know.

      It better be that you haven’t mentioned the map that GZ drew on and crossed out the real position in exchange for a provably false one. The state entered it into discovery a long time ago and seemed to take the effort of disguising its’ importance by only sending in a poor B+W copy.

      What freaks me out to no end is that George was SOMEWHERE when he said the teen was by the clubhouse, now. And it’s clear he could not have been in the clubhouse parking lot since the NEN call timeline won’t fit with his false narrative.

      If the state NEVER did the basic deductive reasoning to see that he was parked facing the mail kiosk, then they are incompetent to a degree that astounds me.

      This element of the case proves a great deal about “intent” and may actually be a separate crime, even. He chased the kid down the street with his car. There’s NO OTHER WAY to make sense of the timeline. The fact that we now seem to have a witness to the final position of the car seems very interesting to me. It completes the ability to present the whole picture.

      I think the whole car to pedestrian chase can be proven WITHOUT the clubhouse videos. With them, it’s better but so be it. W8/ dee dee speaks to the car to pedestrain chase as well.

      I realize ive been a broken record on this aspect but to me it establishes the PATTERN of lies GZ told that can be extended into the missing minutes, providing a strong argument for a jury to see that he’s consistently blamed the kid for things he did that were agresive, and that he knew these aggressive acts were wrong when he chose to lie to SPD.

  5. June 25, 2013 at 12:25 AM

    Whonoze. At the lounge you wrote:
    “It’s not just that GZ’s a habitual 911/311 caller. It’s not just that GZ’s previous call are all about AA “suspects.” It’s that the descriptions of events in them are so similar to his 2/26 call that one can suspect elements of GZ’s account that night were actually drawn from previous events, not Trayvon’s actual actions. For example, it is physically impossible for GZ to have first spotted TM by Frank Taffee’s house as he claims in the “re-enactment.” But he did spot another “suspicious person” by Taffee’s on an earlier occasion.”.

    This is a very interesting perspective. Thanks.
    It would actually be interesting to get a spreadsheet comparing elements of each calls and see if there is a progression or if he had the base model since the beginning.

  6. amsterdam1234
    June 25, 2013 at 6:43 AM

    If I recap Guy’s opening statement, this is about what he said.

    GZ was a wannabee cop, who was very well aware of the elements of the Florida self-defense laws. He was bigger, trained in grappling and kickboxing and was carrying a fully loaded gun. He followed, restrained and murdered Trayvon after criminally profiling him. Seconds after he murdered Trayvon, he started creating “his web of lies”, to create the circumstances for justifyable homocide.

    I think what the State’s strategy will be, is showing GZ is a liar. They can use parts of the stuff we uncovered, without having to try to explain every second of what happened that evening.

    For example, instead of showing everything we got from the clubhouse videos, they may just say, ” he claims he parked his car in front of this window of the clubhouse, but see he never did”.

    They can show with a stopwatch that it is physically impossible for Trayvon, to have run between the houses, return, circle his car and run between the houses again to show GZ is a liar, but they are not using it to proof a complete theory.

    So I don’t think the State is going for a grand unifying theory, but staying within the realm of Willis’ favourite statements ” many things are possible, what GZ claims is not possible” and ” what GZ did he blamed on the kid”.

    • June 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM

      I hope you are right. Certainly the impossibility of the false narrative is a key element to present. If the state attorneys are so dumb they can’t see that aspect they don’t deserve to have a college degree.

      Again I point to the map GZ drew on, and w8 to suggest that the state may even ACCIDENTALLY eventually present evidence to the jury that the movements near the clubhouse had a logic to them. Dee Dee/W8 may say on the stand what she wasn’t asked by BDLR – that TM told her he was chased by a moving car.

      Even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while. A stopped clock is right twice a day. etc.

    • June 25, 2013 at 10:33 AM

      @amsterdam
      I think it was you yesterday who posted somewhere about getting screen shots of the charts etc. the defence was using for their opening, (or willis). I have just posted further down thread the link to the visual of the “timeline” West used for the opening yesterday.

  7. ada4750
    June 25, 2013 at 8:15 AM

    Like on every substantial issue i recall, i agree with whonoze. The opening statement made cry many people, i didn’t or maybe i should but for an other reason. It seems that the prosecution will do the minimum in this case.

    I really don’t understand why they never contacted you guys. For sure they are aware of your very valuable work. I don’t see any flaw but if they were not satisfied for some reason they could have told you and see if it can be modified.

    • June 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM

      We run in different circles, I fear. These are republican, christian, floridian old school state level lawyers who USUALLY are running around charging 12 year old black kids for crimes as adults.

      I have zero faith that they ever read this or BCC list website or were ever aware of them.

      • ada4750
        June 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM

        @willisnewton Are you serious? I believe you are. I can’t imagine nobody around the prosecution read something about your work and spread the word. Did someone try getting in contact with them?

        BTW, i would like to thank you for your unwavering kindness.

  8. June 25, 2013 at 8:27 AM

    Anyone know if the jury will be given any equipment to use to be able to listen to the 911 call with. I mean will they get earphones, maybe a computer to be able to segment it, etc. ?

    • June 25, 2013 at 10:32 AM

      it’s florida. They will be given a coconut shell.

      Sorry for the sarcasm. As you notice the moods a little bleak around here.

      I think however they will have a good enough opportunity to review it somehow. I’d probably think they will give them cheesy headphones and some sort of CD player in the jury room that they can use to listen with. Look at the quality of the skype video conferences and make a judgement based on that. The process “worked” but could have been a lot better with professional audio assistance. That it was used to converse with audio “experts” (not expert according to JN) was an irony not lost on many, I’m sure.

      • June 25, 2013 at 10:39 AM

        Lol…
        Bleak describes my feelings too.

        FYI just posted below the gzlegalcase link to the timeline the defence used yesterday for their opening. Haven’t had time to check it out yet but then you lot are more au fait with the timings than I, so I will be waiting for all your thoughts on whether it seems correct, etc.

  9. June 25, 2013 at 10:20 AM

    @amsterdam, willis, tcoupi, whonoze… for everyone interested

    The GZlegalcase uploaded the timeline the Defence (West) used yesterday in his opening statement.

    • June 25, 2013 at 10:37 AM

      Thanks. Did anyone get a screen grab of the posters West held up to the jury, and waved around like one of those people in front of an oil change place on “manager’s special” day?

      The damn camera never seemed to show them except by accident. I want to see his “evidence map” notations. It seemed to be a digital illustration with EXTREMELY forced perspective such that John’s back yard seemed only a few steps from the T. Quite a cheat, in my opinion.

      ( I got a screen grab from the NBC live stream on my iphone as I was watching but it’s not possible to read any of the notations.)

      • June 25, 2013 at 10:55 AM

        Maybe they’ll upload the “evidence map” later.

        I’m going to try to review (glutton for punishment comes to mind) the video of the opening again today or tomorrow so can try to see if there is a better view of it; croakerqueen123 is uploading good quality videos IMO.

        • June 25, 2013 at 11:12 AM

          thanks. While reviewing, make note of how West in his opening (before lunch as I recall) explains the move from clubhouse parking lot to cut thru vicinity please. Some are saying he goofed here and is more or less describing the car to pedestrian chase that GZ worked so hard to obfuscate. It’s a key point to me. At least jot down the running time on the video and send me a post with a link to the video you are referencing. TIA

        • June 25, 2013 at 7:33 PM

          Willis those “some” are correct:

          West goes from when he says at the 33:19 mark:

          “He [GZ] pulled over to make the call in the vecinity of the clubhouse”

          through describing the exchange with the NEN OP about staring and getting an officer over there, on to a very lengthy justification of why GZ says “these arse-holes always get away” (includes the burglary spate, GZ having made other calls, the NW set up with Doroval with GZ as “coordinator liason”, and the attempted break in a couple of weeks before), following which he goes on to say,

          “George Zimmerman’s still in the car, by that time though he has moved. Was he following Trayvon Martin ? Yes he was following Trayvon Martin”

          at the 35:30 mark

          Hope that’s what you wanted (link below).

      • June 26, 2013 at 2:38 AM

        Willis, forgot what IMO were a real step down; no Trayvon circling GZ’s car at the cut through. So I guess they are going to try to cover that one as a mere loss of memory!

    • June 25, 2013 at 11:20 AM

      Interesting and very manipulative too.
      Did you notice all the empty spaces they put showing howlong GZ stayed on the phone with Sean? They forgot to put the conversation about where to meet and how GZ suddenly changed his mind.
      Did you notice how to the contrary they put a break in the timeline conveniently shortening the timeline between the end of the nen and the end of DD’s call?
      Finally, they did not even put a pin on the start of the nen call.

  10. June 25, 2013 at 10:48 AM

    West’s timeline includes to-the-second times for the calls between TM and Dee Dee/W8. Looks like the teen ran first (George tells the NEN call taker) THEN the call hangs up, and resumes 56 seconds later.

    Factor that into what we have seen already, folks. I’m taking it on faith that West relied on a forensic expert of some kind to retrieve this info either off the phone itself, or from the telecoms. Dunno which but for now I’m guessing the info is correct.

    My questions are, assuming TM ran from say, 3/4 down TTL, did he have time to round the corner onto the dogwalk, run south down the dogwalk and reach the gap in the next buildings before GZ reached the T and looked down it? Speculative scenarios like this are easier to model now that we can know the exact times of the call dropping and reconnecting.

    • amsterdam1234
      June 25, 2013 at 12:30 PM

      The call resumes 20 seconds after it was dropped and about 27 seconds after Trayvon ran. So that could mean Trayvon ran for about 25 seconds. Maybe Tchoupi can run his application to see where that would get Trayvon.

  11. June 25, 2013 at 10:57 AM

    West’s times are a little bit different than how I made my own notes, but that’s because he highlights different moments. On the issue of GZ exiting his car and moving after the teen, I have the following in my old notes:

    Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood.
    2:22 7:11:55 EST)
    Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards?

    WIND NOISE STARTS – GZ MOVES FASTER
    GZ IS AFOOT
    GZ is afoot and closing the gap. His car is at the curb before the bend that turns the street from E-W to N-S again.

    Zimmerman: The back entrance…fucking [unintelligible] (FUCKING C**NS /PUNKS / COLD / GOONS)
    2:23

    ITS POSSIBLE THE FUCKING PUNKS COMMENT IS IN REACTION TO TM’S NOW BEING OUT OF SIGHT – IF SO HE RAN FOR 12 SECONDS
    WIND NOISE

    Dispatcher: Are you following him?
    Zimmerman: Yeah
    Dispatcher: Ok, we don’t need you to do that.
    2:31
    Zimmerman: Ok

    AROUND 7:12:??
    TRAYVON’S PHONE RINGS – HE ANSWERS AND TALKS TO HIS GIRLFRIEND NEAR THE SPOT WHERE HE SOON DIES, BETWEEN THE BACK TO BACK TOWNHOUSES
    THIS IS EARLIEST TRAYVON’S PHONE RINGS

    Dispatcher: Alright sir what is your name?
    Zimmerman: George…He ran.
    2:39

    2:41 ( 7:12:15 EST) GZ HAS LOST SIGHT – NOTE PAST TENSE – “HE RAN”
    IF T.M. WAS IN SIGHT THIS ENTIRE TIME, HE HAS RUN FOR 30 SECONDS IN VIEW OF GZ. I THINK IT IS LESS

    (GZ CLAIMS HE WAS ON RVC BY NOW)

    Dispatcher: Alright George what’s your last name?

    2:46 WIND NOISE STOPS – HE RAN OR JOGGED FOR 25 SECONDS
    GZ MOVES AT A DIFFERENT PACE NOW

  12. June 25, 2013 at 11:34 AM

    regarding west’s charts and posters shown to the jury during his opening.

    looking for a better screen grab of this:

    West.chartphoto

    it’s almost laughable how distorted this illustration is. The space is “stacked up ” like an anamorphic lens rotated sideways. He’s hoping to create the impression that the 40 foot “stumble” was matter of two or three steps, IMO. The tree is no obstacle at all, and the T itself seems not to be in the frame at all.

    I like my photo illustration better where i superimposed Yankee stadium onto the distance of the alleged “stumble”

    YANKEE STADIUM.  Distance GZ claims he stumbled, for comparison.

    and see the related evidence map here:

    YANKEE STADIUM.  Distance GZ claims he stumbled, for comparison.
  13. June 25, 2013 at 11:36 AM

    a short note. Keep going, here folks. Even if the state loses there won’t be immunity from civil suit, and the Martin family doesn’t seem to be ignoring what bloggers are figuring out.

    • amsterdam1234
      June 25, 2013 at 12:22 PM

      I am not worried yet. The only issue so far is whether GZ should’ve followed Trayvon or not.
      State should object more, and I am getting the impression that the SPD is being protected by the State. They should be furious about this Dorival woman, but instead they object about an email exchange that took place between Bill Lee and Zimmerman. That just doesn’t sit right with me.

  14. June 25, 2013 at 3:17 PM

    Lots of “new to us” photos flew by. Anyone getting screen caps? I’m working and watching on my iPhone. Might have got one or two but missed Jon/w13’s shots of the body before anyone but the killer touched it.

    Ofc Raimondo made a good impression in court and no one brought up the case about the homeless guy sucker punched by the son of an officer. He will be a stark contrast to the wannabe cop for the jury to think upon. masters degree. SWAT team sniper. Firearm instructor etc.

    • wassointeresting
      June 25, 2013 at 3:56 PM

      They showed the 7-11 bag and it had been dusted for prints. As far as I know, we never heard or got results from that. They only asked the crime scene tech, Diane Smith, if it had been dusted, but did not discuss the results. I am SOOOO curious to know what they found. Wouldn’t that be something if they found GZ’s prints on the bag?

      • June 25, 2013 at 5:38 PM

        Meh. I’m pretty sure he frisked the kid. He may have shot him BECAUSE he felt the soda can thru the hoodie and made the mental leap to “this kid has got a gun”

  15. June 25, 2013 at 5:40 PM

    Can someone summarize what they think the jury got from the last witness? What’s the take-away here?

    I’m biased…..

    • unitron
      June 25, 2013 at 5:46 PM

      “Can someone summarize what they think the jury got from the last witness?”

      Confusion?

      • June 25, 2013 at 7:18 PM

        she was consistently saying “left to right.” Didnt seem confused about that part.

        I felt she came off more credible than not. But as I said i am biased.

        It’s likely her sister AND her may be conflating something the child saw it heard. We may never know.

        Many things are possible; what GZ claims happened is not possible.

    • wassointeresting
      June 25, 2013 at 6:05 PM

      Oy vay, I’m not sure BDLR did a good enough job to “undo” what the defense was suggesting that she’s lying and today was her first time saying that she saw or heard figures moving towards the T. OMara kept harping on the words “left to right” and I wonder if she was just searching those transcripts for those specific words. Too bad I don’t have time to dig into old transcripts but I thought in her interview with Serino that she indicated that with her backwards drawing, but it may not have been clear if you read the transcript. I think hearing the interview again would be better. Somebody should ask her if she knows what the implications of whether the figures moving right to left or left to right means at all.

      • June 25, 2013 at 6:33 PM

        This was the 1st time she mentioned left-to-right to an official.
        The rest has been very consistent. I really see no change to her story whatsoever.

        MoM tried to paint her as a liar, including by trying to associate Selene with her lying sister, Suzanna. But doing so, he confirmed what Selene said. Suzanna talked about the left-to-right thing. But, we all know that she was taking as hers the story that Selene told her. By pushing Selene, MoM made her say that she told Suzanna (Wit #2) about the left-to-right running noise.

        I could not see BDLR response, so I have no comment to make.

        One thing is sure is that defense is very aggressive.

        • wassointeresting
          June 25, 2013 at 7:24 PM

          MOM asked if she had signed a Change.org petition. She didn’t seem to remember doing so, other than “liking” the page. Then he brought up her facebook account and asked her to read an excerpt from what seems to be a Justice for Trayvon news feed. Then he abruptly ended his questioning and I don’t think BDLR followed up on it either. So the jurors may be under the impression that she was a gung ho TM advocate and would lie to support that “side”. So she admitted to liking the facebook page, but that’s about it. Unlike the ousted potential juror, she didn’t post anything inflammatory. If she really wanted to “lie” she could have said a lot more. Her testimony sounds genuine and I hope the jury can see it for what it is.

      • June 25, 2013 at 6:47 PM

        I have to say that it is the 1st time since Suzanna’s interviews have been outed that I believe that the south-north chase took place.

        Because Selene has always been consistent with her story when she said that she heard running left-to-right I was surprised.
        And when she said that she told her sister about the left-to-right chase, I immediately made the connection. Indeed, Suzanna made that point about the chase. And, I know she was just parroting her sister has if she was the witness.

        Actually, MoM made the connection too. but it took him a bit more time.
        When Selene told him that she told her sister about the left-to-right chase, MoM told her that he will come back to Wit #2 later with a lot of assurance.
        He did come back with a question about Suzanna. He asked Selene if she knew that her sister took her statement has hers. Selene looked surprised. MoM insisted and then suddenly stopped.
        I would bet that MoM realized that if he keeps on pushing that line of accusation, he risks to insinuate that Selene’s left-to-right story is actually genuine since Suzanna, who we know was just repeating Selene’s story, told officers about the left-to-right chase.

        Too bad the Jury will never come to realize how tight was that chess game.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 26, 2013 at 4:50 AM

          Yes, I think this is the first real evidence a south north chase may have taken place. I am not really convinced yet, but if the prosecution can make it stick, I’ll be very happy.

          Hat was more of a surprise to me was that she had them upright. I am beating myself over the head for assuming she meant they were on the ground. She would’ve had no reason to make that distinction. She saw them upright and next time she looked she saw “the body”. Why would she tell investigators about something that didn’t happen, unless they asked

          I think the prosecution’s strategy will be to create a timeline for the jury, as to when the witnesses were watching. Next up I think will be w19 and or w12. Both of them saw and/or heard John. Selena and 19 both have John go back inside when they did, and both can describe what they were doing after they saw John go back inside and before the shot was fired. That will clearly establish that John was outside long before the shot was fired.

          I think w1 will be back on the stand after Selma testifies, or during rebuttal.

          I think the defense missed another tidbit from Selena’s statements. The second time she looked outside after she heard the shot, was at the same time as Selma and Mary were outside. But Selena only saw the body. Just check her description of the body in the Batchelor interview.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 26, 2013 at 4:51 AM

          I said something that didn’t happen, but I meant something she never saw.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 27, 2013 at 2:19 AM

          Did you see Ofc. Raimondo’s testimony? He swung his car onto the grassy area with his headlights towards the T. That light we saw in the EPH coming from RVC, was indeed Raimondo. We’ve got the time right.

      • amsterdam1234
        June 26, 2013 at 5:10 AM

        The jury will get a chance to read those transcripts themselves. Selena did mention movement in the back and running during her statements. She never gave any direction. The defense fucked up big time. They had a 31 page transcription of the deposition West took from Selena. He just didn’t ask her which way they were moving. Big, big fail on their part.

        She is a witness, not an investigator. She wouldn’t have known that the direction they were moving, may have been significant.

        • wassointeresting
          June 26, 2013 at 5:57 AM

          “She is a witness, not an investigator. She wouldn’t have known that the direction they were moving, may have been significant.”

          Exactly. The defense likely did NOT ask her “which way” on purpose, having studied her previous statements, only to focus in on it at trial as an “inconsistency”, when really it is her giving a more complete statement as she says she remembers it.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 26, 2013 at 6:09 AM

          I think they just completely missed it. I’ve noticed they don’t have the timeline right for the witnesses. I think the prosecution is goading them into taking a certain position as to what happened, and that may cost the defense dearly.

    • wassointeresting
      June 25, 2013 at 6:43 PM

      Are we still hoping that it was one of the kids (aka the 8 year old who saw it all through the screened in porch) that actually saw what the sister claimed she saw?

      • June 25, 2013 at 7:22 PM

        Doesn’t seem likely that the kids will testify after we saw this today. But yeah I think it’s positive both sisters are covering for a child, the real witness to a two person foot chase from south to north. We ain’t ever gonna know tho….

        • June 25, 2013 at 7:27 PM

          Possible not positive – typo there

  16. ada4750
    June 26, 2013 at 8:15 AM

    W1 gives an idea of what W8 should expect. I hope BDLR will do a good job. This implies to dig every details (should have been done in April 2012!), almost every seconds of the few minutes when Trayvon lost GZ. This includes also the reason why Trayvon stayed outside. BDLR needs also to question her without any restriction about issues like her silence after this evening, her age and her health.

    BDLR himself must clarify extensively all those items (even the bad looking) and leave nothing to bite to O’Mara. The prosecution needs a flawless testimony from DeeDee. It will be terrible if she stumbles on some tricky questions from O’Mara.

    The prosecution should give long explications on how GZ’s injuries may happened. Some are mentioning the possibility of self-inflicted injuries. Am i alone to find this almost impossible? For sure, the prosecution should not leave this aspect in defense’s hands.

    Mrs Smith, said that she found the bullet case with a metal detector. I suppose the location can be very important. I still don’t know where it was found.

    • June 27, 2013 at 2:51 AM

      The shell casing was found in the area originally covered by the yellow tarp over Trayvon’s body. It was not found until after the body had been moved. It was roughly under the body or very close to it.

      • unitron
        June 27, 2013 at 4:31 AM

        “The shell casing was found in the area originally covered by the yellow tarp over Trayvon’s body. It was not found until after the body had been moved. It was roughly under the body or very close to it.”

        They rolled Trayvon’s body on his left shoulder–basically his left side was the pivot point in contact with the ground.

        Since he was face down before being rolled over, using his left side as pivot point moved him to the right of a face up person.

        The shell would have ejected to Zimmerman’s right, so it probably traveled out of the gun about a foot or foot and a half and hit the ground, and when they rolled Trayvon, they landed him on top of it.

        That increases the odds that Zimmerman was lying down face up at the time of the shot rather than standing, because the shell would have been free to fly farther through the air up, out to his right, and behind him if he’d been standing.

        And if Zimmerman was lying face up, then to be in the path of the bullet, Trayvon would have had to be over him facing toward the ground.

        • ada4750
          June 27, 2013 at 11:31 PM

          @unitron This a video showing the path of a shell casing for Kel Tec PF9. The shell is ejected straight up if the arm is horizontal. According to Zimmerman his arm was about 45 degrees. This means the case should have been found on ground way behind Trayvon’s head. The actual position points to 0 degre (horizontal) arm.

          I have to admit that i know about nothing on fire arms and it’s ok like that.

        • ada4750
          June 27, 2013 at 11:31 PM
  17. ada4750
    June 26, 2013 at 12:26 PM

    I missed the first of W18 testimony. I saw only the cross. She saying a lot more than what i knew. With Serino, her testimony was not decisive. It is a lot more now.

    The voices she heard 5-10 minutes before are puzzling. Nobody else heard that and also if it was Trayvon and GZ that’s mean GZ and DeeDee are lying. Which is quite odd.

    I realize that i have some catch up to do. From now, i wait for your comments guys.

  18. ada4750
    June 26, 2013 at 1:30 PM

    Sorry, a last remark. The number of persons who saw part of the fight but missed the gun shot is amazing. The worst is W1, She missed it because she went to turn the stove off.

    I am not 100% sure that W18 actually saw it. I can’t wait to see the first part of her testimony. I know that whonoze won’t like but i found some of her answers somewhat weak. Like on boys puberty or the light of a gunshot.

  19. wassointeresting
    June 26, 2013 at 2:24 PM

    I would LOVE to know what the jury is thinking right now listening to the string of GZ’s previous calls to the police about suspicious characters. In case any of you missed this parody earlier….

  20. June 26, 2013 at 5:41 PM

    @Unitron

    Did you see Rachel Jeantel’s testimony? What are your thoughts?

    • unitron
      June 26, 2013 at 6:24 PM

      @Unitron

      Did you see Rachel Jeantel’s testimony? What are your thoughts?”

      It turns out I have several hours on the TiVo of a frozen computer screen.

      : – (

      I caught a little bit of the end, and I’m seeing some replays and discussion on TV right now, and my impression so far is she’s a terrible witness for both sides, doesn’t seem to understand how serious this is or to understand her obligations to society as a member of society (thank heavens she’ll never serve as a juror anywhere anywhen), doesn’t seem to understand the concept of only relaying a verbatim account of what she heard instead of just general impressions, and that there is a vital difference, and her attitude seems to be that she shouldn’t have to be wasting her time on this instead of doing something more important to her.

      But I reserve the right to revise any or all of the above as I learn more.

  21. ada4750
    June 26, 2013 at 6:05 PM

    What a huge shock it was. I felt a enormous relieve. DeeDee’s mystery revealed! It also shows, i think, Trayvon “noblesse of heart”.

  22. ada4750
    June 26, 2013 at 6:28 PM

    I really would like to know the conditions her deposition was. Obviously Rachel can easily be mixed. Even so, in a four deposition (or more?) West didn’t pick much

    The deposition was hundred of pages long if i understood well. This means that West asked the same question over and over but in different way until he could get some light inconsistencies.

    I also wonder what kind of relationship (if any) West tried to develop with Rachel. I am saying this by what she said about Crump’s interview and also the way she seemed to have been disappointed with the missed Friday interview with West.

    I have also many more thoughts about this, but maybe later after the trial.

    • unitron
      June 26, 2013 at 6:44 PM

      “This means that West asked the same question over and over but in different way until he could get some light inconsistencies.”

      Based on what little of her I’ve heard so far he could have asked over and over again trying to get an answer he could understand, both from an audibility and a logical point of view.

      • ada4750
        June 26, 2013 at 6:55 PM

        Sure, only to be well understood must have take a long time. But the occasion seemed way to nice for West. He may very well tried to intentionally confuse her. In fact, i am quite sure he did.

        She many times answered “i told you”. And she did, maybe 5 times on 6 and didn’t realize that she got trick on one of them.

        • ada4750
          June 26, 2013 at 9:46 PM

          Well, i listened again Rachel and i guess i did paranoid somewhat with West. I was very touched with her testimony and at the same time frustrated with West. Add to that my great personnel fatigue. I should have been sleeping but no way i would have missed her.

          But still, i wonder if she was alone with West for deposition. Legally, she is an adult but not mentally. What rule applies in this case?

          It must be a real dilemma for the jury. It is like convicting someone after the testimony of a child. Except maybe if the testimony is supported with others evidence.

        • June 27, 2013 at 12:46 AM

          I too was taken with feisty Rachel but then I am biased as my partner has two adult sons with severe learning difficulties and I have worked as a voluntary advocate with LD adults for nigh on 10 years. She is more difficult than some but not as difficult as others and as most appears to have high functioning in some life skills (she has a memory for dates and times that is quite formidable) and low in others, much as us “normal” folk!

          I had a glance at US law and as a defendant, if she has a mild to moderate learning difficulty, which I think she does, she would be shielded, but as a witness for her testimony to be barred she would have to be deemed incapacitate and I don’t think she is. The problem is not lies and deceit because any lie more complex than the answer to “Who ate the cake” would require complex thought processes which I don’t think she has, and she can’t be coaxed to lie either as she would soon be found out. But she could vary an answer according to mood, and even walk out if stressed. In the UK I would consider her eligible to have had an advocate like myself, a supporter or carer, or a family member with her, and she would have been given more breaks and possibly even allowed to testify via video link, but in the US I don’t know.

          Obviously, none of this makes her easy material for judge or jury. From the way she dealt with her, JN seems au fait with the situation, and if I read it correctly she can chose to instruct the jury on how much reliability to place on Rachel’s testimony. But if she does, I would hope it would be high in most parts because, whether front to back or back to front, Rachel has stuck very firmly to her story and IMO is utterly believable… I mean you couldn’t make some of her answers up even if you tried !

  23. ada4750
    June 26, 2013 at 6:49 PM

    What about the big question? Will the jury believe her?

    • June 26, 2013 at 9:55 PM

      That may depend on their experience with “special needs” kids. If any of them have a relative with developmental issues, or have worked with such kids in school, they will likely consider her “odd” behavior to be a sign of authenticity. Any jurors who have been more sheltered may judge her lack of filters and court-proper manners more negatively. I doubt this would break along ideological lines, though. I wouldn’t be surprised if the jury winds up having to take some time to hash this out amongst themselves once they begin deliberations.

  24. June 26, 2013 at 10:37 PM

    I think I see the shape of the State’s case now, and it seems to me that they are indeed not at all tuned in to the space-and-timeline issues we have explored. I think BDLR is going to base his closing on that whiteboard he is building, adding the witness names one by one, and so the State’s argument will be based on eyewitness testimony and forensics relating to the moment of the gunshot itself. As such, I worry they will fail to fully expose certain of GZ’s falsehoods which have been introduced in the trial already in the premises of Defense questions (without objection from the State, grrrr).

    For example, West was going on and on with Rachel about the “missing time” between Trayvon’s walk home from the 7-11 and the confrontation. He is basing this, of course, on the assumption that GZ did actually see TM walking on RVC sometime after 7PM. Of course, we’re pretty darn sure TM was under the mailbox awning from around 6:45 until he walked out towards GZ’s truck and home. BDLR could establish this, and put the kibosh on West’s BS if he just asked Rachel, “About how long was Trayvon at the mail shed before he walked off toward home? How much time passed between the time he first told you he arrived at the mail area and the time he told you the man was watching him?” But I don’t think he’s going to ask that, just as he’s going to get willis even more agitated by NOT asking about the car-to-pedestrian pursuit.

    • June 27, 2013 at 3:13 AM

      I wondering if the state intends to ignore all the SPD interview material for the purposes of not allowing any of the self defense claims to be aired in open court.

      Seems like a trade off since this is the best evidence of GZs utter and complete lack o credibility.

  25. June 26, 2013 at 10:46 PM

    Dee dee confirms the car to pedestrian chase but BDLR fails to question her specifically on the point again today

  26. June 26, 2013 at 11:31 PM

    iirc some here were posters at TL so you may already know of nomatter_nevermind’s (with a few contributions from others), running commentary of Rachel’s testimony. Apart from thorough it is an extremely good basically unbiased read recounting the events of today in an extremely witty way. Can’t wait for his/hers next episode!
    http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2506.0.html

    • June 27, 2013 at 9:09 AM

      His “extremely thorough” running commentary has nothing at all to say, and fails to even mention in passing the “following” aspect of her testimony.

      He’s more interested in the difference between Arizpna Ice Tea Company Watermelon Fruit Drink and “tea” than in whether George Zimmerman frightened trayvon into running away or not, and seems to think somehow this difference in description of beverage (the same beverage) somehow can be used to “impeach” the witness.

      • June 28, 2013 at 6:12 PM

        Sorry willis if I misled you on “thorough”, but it was “thorough” for my needs, i.e. a short step by step account of the day so I can find sections quicker on the videos, and with a minimum of biased comments and/or analysis of what was being said and what it meant which IMO it is.

        In respect of his beverage comment, maybe this trial is clouding my ability to recognise humour, because I would have sworn NMNM’s comment about impeaching Rachel over a contradiction in the beverage was in sarcasm, i.e. he was inferring how the hysterical fanatically pro z’s, one of which I don’t think he is, would be baying for her impeachment on such a minor contradiction. That’s the way I interpreted it anyway, helped by other comments of his I have read, because no-one in their right mind could think you could impeach someone’s whole testimony on something as minor as that. At least in this case, because were this about death by poisoned drink, then yes, it may well be a very important detail!
        ; – )

  27. June 26, 2013 at 11:53 PM

    I can understand dee dee fairly well . I also think she is getting sympathy every time. West badgers her over not picking details

    • amsterdam1234
      June 27, 2013 at 2:03 AM

      I can understand her too. Probably because we listened to her interviews. I saw a nasty old white man, attempting to frustrate, confuse, and intimidate a teenager

  28. June 27, 2013 at 2:26 AM

    What I got from RJ’s (DeeDee’s) narrative on day 3 with BDLR is the following:
    1) TM, coming from the store, used a short cut to get to the mailbox area.
    2) While at the mailbox area, he noticed GZ watching him (That means TM was at RATL’s mailbox),
    3) He decided to resume walking home,
    4) GZ followed him (I could not tell if it was physically or by sight),
    5) TM decides to run from the back (the meaning of “from the back” is still a mystery)
    6) The phone connection is lost, she calls back (in line with evidences)
    7) TM told Rachel he lost GZ and that he was by his dad’s fiance’s house (By the house came earlier so the meaning is not clear)
    8) He decides to walk
    9) He notices, a couple seconds later, that GZ is still following (this is a change in time scale as in previous accounts she stated a couple of minutes later)
    10) She stated that she stopped talking with TM for some time as she was fixing her hair
    11) She heard TM say “What are you following me for?” (no change there)
    12) She heard another voice saying “What are you doing around here?”
    13) She heard a bump and the headset falling on the grass
    14) last she heard was TM’s voice saying “get off” 2x

    To my senses, the core of her account has not changed a iota.

    • June 27, 2013 at 6:44 AM

      @tchoupi

      5) TM decides to run from the back (the meaning of “from the back” is still a mystery)

      No mystery Tchoupi, because she clarified that without being asked as:

      “the back area”

      I can’t remember whether during chief or cross but I am almost sure she did because I was sort of urging whoever was questioning, well urging my computer screen, to ask her because I imagined it was the dog walk but wanted her to confirm it. And she did… very eloquently. I will try to listen to the tapes to see if I can find it.

      • June 27, 2013 at 9:42 AM

        Is that right? I missed that one. It is still not obvious to me where the back area is but I can assume it is the dogwalk.

        • June 27, 2013 at 9:47 AM

          In the context, the where and why, she said it I automatically concluded she meant the dog walk. I will try and find it in the next few days, starting with Bernies chief because I think that is probably where it is.

        • June 27, 2013 at 10:29 AM

          Tchoupi, Rachel just explained it again now to West. It will be roughly between 1.25 to 1.26 of today´s video when it’s posted.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 27, 2013 at 6:38 PM

          @ gbrbsb
          Rachel doesn’t know the area. She just relays what she heard Trayvon say. She thought it all happened right next to hs father’s house.

    • June 27, 2013 at 9:16 AM

      “From the back” is, to her, what we would say when we mean “to the back” or that he intends to enter his home from the back DOOR.

      When she speaks of being by his fathers house she means, AND she said, the AREA near his back door. In other words the ENTIRE dog walk area.

      Now that we know the actual amount of time TM was out of contact with her, an presumably that he stopped running when he answered her call back, in my opinion he lacked the time to run to the end of the building that W11 and W6/ John Goode lived in.

  29. June 27, 2013 at 10:31 AM

    THANK YOU DON WEST.

    he just made the point clear that GZ followed TM WITH HIS CAR

  30. wassointeresting
    June 27, 2013 at 11:29 AM

    Why are people calling Rachel learning disabled? I’m not saying anyone here is saying that disrespectfully of her but I’m just wondering what is the basis of that. As far as I can see, she’s trying really hard to hold herself together under cross. She’s been irritated with the defense since her deposition I gather, but she’s able to call out West a number of times when he’s gotten her statements wrong.

    • June 27, 2013 at 11:43 AM

      She displays many symptoms of Autism Spectrum Disorder: Precision with numbers. Literal interpretation of language. Failure to comprehend figurative language. Failure to pick up non-verbal context. Lack of social “filters.” Head bobbing as she tries to listen….

    • amsterdam1234
      June 27, 2013 at 6:43 PM

      I agree with you, she is pretty damn smart. She has some kind of speech impediment, and her education may have been subpar, but I’ve been watching today with joy and amazement how she took West to task.

      • June 27, 2013 at 7:03 PM

        She definitely looked strong today. She’s been x-exam’d until she stumbled to one question. That took 3.5+ hours.
        I’d like to see another witness hold for so long and questioned repeatedly on every single point of his/her testimony. I’m thinking of GZ in particular.

      • wassointeresting
        June 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM

        I don’t think she has a clinical speech impediment. It’s kinda like a British national saying Ms. Georgia or Ms. Texas have speech impediments. It’s a combination of her speaking style and an artifact of some recordings. When I hear her in a live stream, I can understand her fairly well. And it’s even better if I hear her say on a news broadcast when they’ve cleaned out the noise or turned up the volume. It’s only when I hear her speaking on a youtube video that it’s less understandable. The people in the room with her may not hear her well because she’s not speaking loudly enough. I find it ridiculous that West tried to imply that she may not understand English because she grew up speaking two other languages. She’s a 19 year old with an attitude. I would LOVE to hear her give her full statement as if she’s talking with her girl or guy friends in her natural tone of voice and vernacular. I think that would give us a more complete picture. We’re kind of dealing with her telling her testimony in a way that’s not natural to her For example, she felt the need to “clean up” the language in previous interviews (e.g., she “translated” TM’s word “cracker” as “white”). Or to become more “precise”, such as when she used to just say TM’s “dad’s house”, now she strains and looks up everytime she refers to the residence as TM’s “dad’s fiancee’s house”. It’s not an inconsistency, just a different way of saying things. If TM was staying with his dad in Sanford, then essentially that’s his “dad’s house”. I don’t see other witnesses’ every syllable being picked apart over and over again like her, poor girl.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 27, 2013 at 7:48 PM

          I can understand her fine. I listened to her original interview with BdlR, and got used to her way of speaking. I loved how she was really articulating her words today.

          I always thought she was a lot smarter than people gave her credit for. Nothing would piss me off more than seeing people try to diminish and redicule her. I am not familiar with the local accent, so I have no way of comparing it.
          What I do think is that she may be a product of a failing educational system. Which is to bad, because it is obvious this girl has some talents. I do admire how she was able to control her anger, while that creepy ass cracker, was allowed to piss all over her.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 27, 2013 at 7:48 PM

          too bad.

  31. ada4750
    June 27, 2013 at 12:09 PM

    More West digs more Rachel sounds true!! West is playing win or lose. Right now he is losing.

  32. ada4750
    June 27, 2013 at 12:24 PM

    I wonder when West will ask the nature of their conversation and why Trayvon did not enter home? Game over if Rachel answers those questions without problem.

    • wassointeresting
      June 27, 2013 at 7:44 PM

      I watched most of Rachel’s testimony, but not all. The only new thing I got about their conversation that didn’t have to do with the creepy butt crispy snack (please forgive the translation) following TM was that he asked her to look and see if the allstar game was going on or something like that while he was back at the mail boxes. So yeah, no one asked her what other words she exchanged with TM after he ran behind the townhomes?

      • ada4750
        June 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM

        Not a single question! I wrote that Bald Head Dude should explore intensively those questions before the defense. I guess he knew that Rachel was able to answer well and he preferred to take any chance.

  33. ada4750
    June 27, 2013 at 2:45 PM

    Rachel did so well. Can not be better. I am surprised the questions i just mentioned were not raised. I can figure only one reason. They asked them in depo and she answered adequately. During lunch, they realized that Rachel was not breaking and there was very little chance for it. They were just making GZ’s case worst.

  34. June 27, 2013 at 7:50 PM

    so, another day at the Colosseum dodging lions (and wasting time, as Bob Dylan sang.)

    I was greatly encouraged that BDLR worked to speak to the issue of “street signs” and the address on W11’s unit. It makes me wonder about prosecution strategy, because he still seemingly has the option to NOT enter into evidence the statements to SPD.

    If he leaves them out of evidence, how does GZ assert the idea that he was defending himself? I know that West laid out the idea that GZ was attacked and shot to defend himself in his opening, but where is the evidence of this? I’m just not a lawyer. But I’m wondering if there is a strategy here where BDLR and the state will NOT delve into the lies GZ told to SPD at all.

    The idea that GZ got out of his car to look for a street sign was marginally believable to HIM at the time because IMO he thought the call to NEN was not recorded, and that he could fudge the details and omit the aspect of the incident where the teen ran away (from his moving car). But when you combine that BS story with the sound of his car door opening three seconds after saying “sh*t, he’s running,” it sure looks like a deliberate attempt to put forth a false narrative to me. It’s stiff like this that would make me, were I the lead prosecutor, to be sure to include statements to SPD.

    Can BDLR wait to bring in that material on rebuttal when it is the defense’s term if he fails to bring it in as part of the state’s case at their phase of building a case? I need a lawyer to explain all this.

    • ada4750
      June 27, 2013 at 8:47 PM

      “how does GZ assert the idea that he was defending himself?” From the injuries. But anyway the defense does not need to prove anything.

      You mentioned the possibility that the prosecution won’t enter the GZ’s statements into evidence. This is interesting. Would it mean that the only way the defense can present GZ’s version is to make him testify?

      Or does it mean that the prosecution thinks that his statements are more favorable for him despite his inconsistencies?

      • June 27, 2013 at 10:07 PM

        to your last question, both, I assume. But the result would be to force GZ to take the stand, where they could cross examine him and THEN also bring in the statements to SPD, possibly?

        The blind leading the blind, we ain’t lawyers, huh?

        maybe the prof. over at leatherman law will speak to this strategy issue, or already has and someone can enlighten me.

        • ada4750
          June 27, 2013 at 10:54 PM

          I don’t know if Mr. Leatherman wrote about that, This strategy would also explain the short prosecution opening statement which i erroneously found so empty,

          I believe that Zimmerman’s written statement is independently admissible.

    • ada4750
      June 27, 2013 at 8:58 PM

      And also, if GS’s statements are not enter that may explain why the prosecution does not talk about the Club House cameras, Maybe they will, if GZ testifies. Can they without an expert?

      • June 27, 2013 at 10:09 PM

        I get the feeling the state looked at the cameras in a cursory fashion once or twice and then never again visited the issue. They may have had an intern look at YouTube and saw a bunch of conspiracy theories and one very important 47 minute video that the intern ignored…… sigh.

        • ada4750
          June 27, 2013 at 10:57 PM

          That would be a shame, honestly.

        • unitron
          June 28, 2013 at 12:37 AM

          Chances are they have you “headlighters” tucked away in the same mental dust bin where they put truthers and birthers.

          And trying to lay it out for a jury to grasp might be a lot more than they want to grapple with even if they did think there was any “there” there.

        • wassointeresting
          June 28, 2013 at 5:21 AM

          Admittedly, the complicated four video camera analysis would confuse the heck out of the jurors and there’s no identifying marks on any of the vehicles that would confirm that any specific one was GZ’s truck. However, one would think that they would show that GZ did not park in front of the clubhouse. HOWEVER, my feeling about this is that it’s low on their priority list of things to prove to the jury. It’s not enough for them to just say, “Oh, he didn’t park in front of the clubhouse exactly at that spot” A forgiving juror might say, ok so he parked a bit before or a bit after or out on the street where the headlights can’t be seen, so what’s the point?” The major point is that GZ spotted TM some ways away from where he ended up parking. In GZ’s statements, he denied “following, just going in the same direction” but It seems the defense is not denying that GZ was “following” TM now. If GZ’s prior statements eventually get admitted into evidence, then they may get the opportunity to emphasize the length of time and ground distance during which TM was aware of being followed.

  35. June 27, 2013 at 7:58 PM

    Over on TalkLeft (snort) Jeralyn thinks she’s caught Jayne Surdyka in a lie, as Jayne said she only did one TV interview and CNN aired two: one with Anderson Cooper and one with Ashley Banfield.

    Jeralyn doesn’t know how TV news is produced. Jayne probably did give only one interview, which was then cut into two segments, each constructed as to appear separate and unique.

    I’m sure Jayne was never in the same room with either Cooper or Banfield. She wouldn’t have left FL, and the CNN anchors wouldn’t have left NYC or DC or wherever they work. Jayne would have been in a studio in FL (Orlando probably) and been interviewed, probably by a CNN producer (though possibly one of anchors…), maybe in person, or maybe via a video hook-up. The interview probably took between 45-60 minutes. They would have isolated the audio, so there’s no cross-talk between mics or speakers. Then a news editor would have cut the interview down to make the two approximately 8 minute segments used for air. At that point they do a studio setup with the anchors, bathed in nice 3-point lighting, and the anchors repeat the questions used in the finished pieces (regardless of who uttered them originally). Then the editor cuts the two sets of audio and video together, creating the illusion of a seamless contemporaneous interview, complete with a bit of overlapping dialog to match the original. They do this not to manipulate, but to have control over sound and image: fit everything neatly into the time slot for the package, makes sure no one stumbles or goes off track.

    In contrast, when you see real live interviews on TV, e.g. on Matthews, Maddow, O’Donnel etc. even with one professional talking head interviewing another, there are always little flubs of one sort or another.

    • June 27, 2013 at 8:16 PM

      If that’s the best she’s got, after a couple of days of this trial…. lol.

      (I’m sure her lapdogs agree that clearly this proves GZ was savagely attacked, etc)

      They are so far off in the weeds of group-think over there it’s more surreal than a Salvador Dali painting in a blender. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

      To date, no one on that site has answered the basic question of where GZ was when he said “by the clubhouse now/ yeah, now he’s walking towards me.”

      They probably still think there are two Dee Dee’s – one from yesterday and another who testified today.

    • June 27, 2013 at 9:12 PM

      I believe that the point was actually clarified. She got one session of interviews for two shows.

      • June 27, 2013 at 10:41 PM

        I confirm that it was clarified right at the time. Check the link past 6:30:

        • June 27, 2013 at 10:42 PM

          Wrong link but the YT account has it all. Check Day #3 part #2

  36. June 27, 2013 at 9:43 PM

    I took some notes today.
    Here are the ones about W11…

    View obstructed by blinds at night. Heard voices outside backyard. No words. Coming from the left (the T). Three-part exchange. Tone flustered and not confrontational. Heard scuffling around: snicker on pavement then the grass. Has experience of noises outside. Sounded at first people standing up then people rolling around wrestling. No punching. Called 911 as soon as heard scuffling. 30sec to 911 call. Jeremy tried calling. When dialing heard yells (no word heard). While on the phone with 911 dispatcher started to hear yells for help. Says just one person (male) yelled for help. Yells stopped at gunshot. Heard her neighbor (John Good) open his sliding glass door and say “what the hell are you doing”. Jeremy speaking on the background. Heard nothing like “you’re going to die tonight motherfucker”. Heard “I have a gun. Take my gun” but could not identify who said it. The truck is Jeremy’s.
    With MoM W11 says a couple of yelps before connecting with 911 but says not “help”.

  37. June 27, 2013 at 9:45 PM

    Here are my notes about W16 (Selma):

    Mary Cutcher had a 8-yo daughter on the night of the killing. Heard soft crying sound. Could not hear specific words. Did not see anything outside the kitchen window.
    Says GZ was in a riding position facing the north. Could not initially where GZ’s hands were she believe he must have been supporting himself with his hands. [I did not understand what she describes]. She saw a bit of leg movement. She said “What’s going on” loudly in English. No one answered. GZ turned around but did not respond. She asked again “what’s going on?” with no responds. At 3rd time, GZ finally responded with “Just call the police”. She saw GZ get up and take a few steps from where the body was. GZ walked a few steps, then walked back and while pacing he had a right hand on his head and the left one on his waist. She did not see GZ stumble or collapse. Saw TM face down. She saw someone with a flashlight. She moved back to the house b/c her room mate told her that there was a gunshot. She saw a neighbor from across the dogwalk down the last south house go outside. She interacted with her a bit. Mary Cutcher was inside in the dining area with 911 on the phone. She saw police cordon off the area in front of her house.
    MOM’s x-exam. She was making coffee. Had to reach out to a column to see. She heard the crying coming from the north. She thought the gunshot was a child slapping on cement. The sliding back door was partially open when she heard the whining. She reenacts her account from the gunshot. Mary C was with her in the kitchen. She was out in ~5sec (Bwahahahaha). It was dark and could see silhouettes. Sees GZ with knees on the ground leaning over TM’s body. She assumes that to keep balance GZ must have had his hands on some parts of the body. Could not see if GZ was moving TM’s hands while on top. Confirms GZ did not respond initially to her call and then said just call the police. He got up and started to walk toward the T and came back to the body 2 or 3 x before Jon Manalo showed up. Assumes that GZ had the position of a concerned person when he had one hand on his head. She describes GZ as a acting as a concerned person. Admits he could be acting as a confused person. Talked about whether GZ’s flashlight helped her seeing him. Could she see blood on hjis head when he was leaning on TM? : NO. Blood on his nose when he was pacing? : NO.
    GUY again: Any idea what was going on when GZ pacing? NO. Are the bushes and columns behind her house the same [height] has the one at the front house? Yes

    • June 27, 2013 at 10:16 PM

      thanks, i missed this part.

      She seems to be the first to actually speak to/ speak at GZ post shooting.

      The answer to her question, “what’s going on?” would be that the teen was in the process of dying but probably not completely dead yet as GZ searched his body or whatever he was doing.

      What’s new to me is that he returned “to the body” 2 or 3 times. Did she elaborate on what this means? Did he touch the dying teen more times, examine him, take out things from his pockets, etc? Could she have seen if he did or not?

      I’m curious about the tan bag…. she would have been the one to see it move had she had the light to do so I guess, and had he taken it from the hoodie pocket post-shooting for whatever reason.

      • June 27, 2013 at 10:37 PM

        Willi, this is something she mentioned on TV. She said GZ was up and started to pace going up toward the T and back to TM’s body 2x-3x before Jon Manalo showed up.

        He was on the phone already. I’m sure of that because of too many witnesses saying he had his right hand to his head and Jon Manalo stating that he sounded like he was on the phone.

        I believe that the State has multiple angle of attacks and that one off theme is the seemingly consensus that GZ was on top right after the shooting. That means that he was either on top at the shooting or was still very alert. The other angle of attack is the being alert thing. Selma was asked if GZ was stumbling. I believe Jon Manalo will be asked the same kind of question. Then will come the EMT guys to testify that GZ’s wound were all superficial and that his bios were all in the green. In the end, they will show that he lied on multiple accounts.

  38. June 27, 2013 at 9:58 PM

    I spent some time with the new phone call timings and google earth last night. Has anyone else? It’s interesting to plot speculative paths that TM may have taken when he ran…. assuming he stopped running around the time that W8/DD/RJ called him back.

    As I’ve said before, tragically her calling him back may have been the reason he STOPPED running. But looking at it now, with better precision I’m bolstering my opinion that GZ said “effing punks/coons/goons” (whatever) IN RESPONSE to looking back to where he had seen the teen running and no longer being able to tell where he went – whether he went straight towards RVC or else turned south onto the dog walk. I realize he told NEN that the teen was headed to the back gate, but that was his belief as to what ALL “these axxholes” do when they are making a swift getaway. Also TTL feeds down to the back entrance anyway and he was thinking like a car driver not a pedestrian. So long as the “suspect” was not moving towards the front entrance or the shortcut by Taffe’s unit he must be going to the only other way out, the back gate.

    I’m of the belief that TM never knew if GZ exited the vehicle or not while Trayvon was running. He would have had to look back, and I doubt he was interested in doing that. I think he sprinted as fast as he could go, for a short distance and that’s why he was very winded.

    He DID see him soon after he stooped running, but was it ten seconds or nearly two minutes? Let’s think it thru.

    Also, what if anything did anyone glean from hearing W8/DD/RJ speak to the time periods that separated various things TM told her? I’m talking about during the “missing minutes.” For better or worse Don West’s 3.5 hour cross examination did seem to cover some of that ground a little bit more. Sometimes she said “a few minutes” and sometimes “a few seconds” later is when TM saw the creepy guy closing in.

    My general impression is that TM told her the CAR was following him, and that he planned to go the back way to lose the car, told her, and when he reached a good position he took off for the dog path and the phone hung up somehow just as this happened and she was telling him to RUN. I think it was a slow motion “chase” at first where TM walked, pretending not to be afraid, when GZ either backed up, or turned his vehicle around somehow, probably with the lights still off at first. TM seems to have had time to tell her enough to make her admonish him to run.

    here is a sequence with the time intervals generally noted

    GZ: “these assholes always get away”

    Then for the next excruciating 38 seconds the following happens:

    Trayvon walks on TTL already east of the car, having passed it.

    the car starts to move

    TM: paraphrased (something is happening now/ the car is backing up after me/now he’s turning around/ i think i can run FOR the back it gets worse)
    DD/RJ: paraphrased (gosh golly, it’s already worse, Run now)

    the teen runs.

    GZ says to NEN “shit, he’s running” (and I’m out of time to drive past him)

    that’s not a lot of dialog, and it’s a LONG time to walk if you are bluffing that you are not intimidated by a creepy guy in a car trolling behind you. Recall how deliberately the car trolled the mail kiosk, and now add to that whatever animosity GZ feels after being “dissed” by the “asshole”

    Seven or eight seconds later the call between TM and DD ends. For at least a few seconds Dee Dee heard TM running away from a car she knew to be moving behind him.

    Trayvon has been running for seven seconds already. After around ten seconds he is at or near the corner of W11’s unit and likely out of sight of GZ, who may be distracted by parking and gathering his flashlight etc.

    TM runs for a maximum of 21 more seconds, give or take and stops to answer her return call. If he had ran the entire time full speed he’s still not reached his home. At a sprinter’s pace he’d still need 14 more seconds at least, and he’s a spry enough kid but not an athlete like Jesse Owens. Realistically, he has little incentive to keep running once he’s made the corner. But he’d probably “run it out” a bit like a baseball player making it to first base on a close call, then put his hands on his knees or whatever to recover for a second or two. That takes him to John Goode’s back yard area aprox. before he has the OPPORTUNITY to begin walking, if that is indeed what he did. Let’s put that time, the run-out and the catching the breath at 8-12 seconds.

    Let’s assume he wants to walk home, feels no danger and heads south at his walking speed for the ten remaining seconds it takes for the phone to ring again. If so, NOW he’s reached the end of the first building. He’s probably NOT on the sidewalk since he rounded the corner in the grass.

    That to me is the “how far could he go” realistic estimate. The “short run” version wold be that he ran it out to the same general area and took longer to recover and chose NOT to move for whatever reason.

    Then she called back and he was winded and told her he was safe, meaning he had reached the dog path area and gone down into it at least some, thinking he’d lost the car, and that the incident was over. Cars don’t chase people down walking paths.

    How does the next interval of time pass?

    There seems to have been some banter about a rapist here, a declarartion and a response at the least.

    She seems to have spoken with him enough to discern that he was not inside his house, yet, and pushed him to get all the way there or at least expressed concern. Trayvon would have spent at least a few moments saying how he felt about the creepy person and telling her not to worry, that he was in the AREA of his dad’s home. She used this word specifically once to describe where he was during her cross examination with West yesterday I believe. In her mind in THAT MOMENT Trayvon must have been right outside his door which is what frustrated her, and made her also think the father could protect him if a fight started. Then it dawns on her that he’s NOT that close, and she seems to have been telling him to run the rest of the way home, but he says he will merely walk fast. All this would take some time. He wouldn’t say he will walk fast if he knows GZ is out of the car and in pursuit, IMO. It’s a thing to say when you THINK you are in the clear now.

    During all this it is possible that TM sees GZ crossing towards RVC and lowers his voice. I have no idea where he was but as many here know I put some weight into the fact that the only physical evidence we have that he went anywhere at all are the few items found near John Goode/W6’s back yard. By my estimates TM didn’t have time to run too far past that point before his phone rang. (I think he stopped to answer it as soon as it rang a time or two.)

    All of this dialog and these events take place however – and then, as TM was already “walking fast” or assuring her he would, in some direction, and possibly back the way he came, GZ re-appears and TM KNOWS it is him. He expresses this definitively to his friend and then someone closes the gap, seemingly GZ moving faster than TM. Why would he know for certain it was the same person? Jacket color? Flashlight? I don’t think it is by recognizing the face, not at first.

    (Did GZ shine his flashlight on TM as the teen walked past his car? It’s possible, and if so then he would know from a greater distance if he spotted GZ somewhere with his keychain flashlight approaching his direction)

    TM tells his friend the guy is getting closer. We know by this that at least ONE of them is moving.

    It’s here, possibly that W1 hears the short scramble.

    What we can guess is that GZ closes the gap as TM uses his words to try to deflect the pursuit. Possibly turning back to face his pursuer. Keep in mind he’s likely got one hand on his phone and the other on the heavy can to keep it steady as he moves. One or both are probably inside his hoodie pocket.

    “Man, why are you following me (for)?” he says.

    “What are you doing around here?” GZ says in a loud voice.

    possibly TM repeats his first line.

    Then the “bump” happens and TM’s ear bud headset yanks loose from the phone, or only from TM’s ear. TM has either thrown a punch or moved his arm quickly to brush off an attempt to be grabbed by GZ who has closed in. I think the latter is more likely, and that GZ’s grab yanked the wire out of the ear or the phone or both.

    maybe it’s not until here that they start the “quarterback scramble” but one ensues somehow in a manner that W8/Dee Dee/RJ hears the headset drag thru the grass or the sound of the phone itself tumbling thru the grass. Or she heard clothing rustle and thought it was wet grass sounds, as the phone, now without the headset plugged in switches audio tones and the QB scramble, the grappling, or the wresting on the ground occurs.

    We are about to finally learn some more about how the headphones were found, I hope as the trial progresses. Maybe the first responders will speak about it. IIRC the CSI person, Ms Smith didn’t really do her job on this part.

    At some point TM becomes separated from his phone and she hears the “little” voice saying get off, get off. Somehow the phone goes dead. For all we know this was the battery dying after a long day of being drained. Perhaps Trayvon hits a button as he drops the phone, but it seems like the phone call would end before the phone hits the ground in that case. So many possibilities.

    But those are some of my working notes at present. I welcome any comments.

    • unitron
      June 28, 2013 at 12:32 AM

      From the picture now available (probably the one taken on his cell phone by the cop that also took the Zimmerman nose picture so he could ask if anyone recognized either guy) that shows Trayvon face up with the ear buds near the left side of his head, the cord was probably still run under the hoodie down to wherever the phone was.

      It’s just a shot of his head and a little of his upper chest, so you can’t see the plug end of the cord.

    • Gracie
      June 28, 2013 at 10:56 PM

      I’ve been looking at the photos of the clothes that were released a short while ago. I posted here because I was bothered by the lack of dirt on the back of GZ’s pants (in the white embroidery).

      I was also struck by some dirt on the inseam of Trayvon’s pants near the knee on the right leg. It looks like someone kicked him or something because it’s an odd place to get the type of dirt that is there. It’s not general grass stains. It looks more like a skid mark left by a shoe.

      Now that we know GZ had 1 1/2 years of MMA training, I’m wondering if he didn’t try to do some sort of knee kick takedown on TM? Maybe something like in this video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiCyS4ZXHUU

      What do you think?

      (P.S. I used to post on Talkleft too but I’m obviously on the wrong side of the rules.)

  39. June 28, 2013 at 9:17 AM

    HERE COMES THE SURVEILLANCE VIDEO!

    (Holds breath. Thanks Tchoupi, and the gods….)

    They better get it right. Let’s hope the state has interns who have read this site and the BBClist site.

    • ada4750
      June 28, 2013 at 9:19 AM

      the 18 minutes delay are they in accordance with your study?

      • June 28, 2013 at 10:55 AM

        not my study but at first it was said by autorities that there was a 16 minute gap. People here looked at it and said it was NOT 16 and more time. I think the 18 is close or the same as what tchoupi, amsterdam and whonoze et al think. You’ll have to hear one of them… i’m not the expert on this but I think its right.

      • June 28, 2013 at 11:36 AM

        No but the witness also said that it is not sharp 18min. Our study is 16.5minutes give or take seconds.
        The main clock setter is Ofc T. Smith. I hope he will be on the stand soon.

        • ada4750
          June 28, 2013 at 1:06 PM

          Your estimate margin of error is few seconds? How come the state’s expert can not give any margin error? Maybe somebody else will do (like Ofc T.Smith) Maybe also the state called this guy because he doesn’t know so he could not give the exact delay to the defense. They keep it for later if necessary.

          18 minutes would mean that GZ was already on phone when he stopped at the mail box.

        • ada4750
          June 28, 2013 at 1:28 PM

          16.5 minutes is 16 min and 30 secs right? 18 mins delay would approximately mean that GZ was at the mailbox when he says “Now he’s coming towards me”

        • ada4750
          June 28, 2013 at 6:05 PM

          “The main clock setter is Ofc T. Smith” Ok, i understand now.

          If the state got the wrong time, it’s a problem. At least they can still prove that GZ never parked in front,

    • wassointeresting
      June 28, 2013 at 9:23 AM

      Wow, I just logged on and saw them show the vehicle light in the east pool hall video that we think is GZ!

      • ada4750
        June 28, 2013 at 9:37 AM

        Very short! I suppose they introduced it only in case Zimmerman stand the bar. They will bring the expert again if.Zimmerman testifies.

      • June 28, 2013 at 11:38 AM

        This is definitely one of the main element of the CCTV. This is the only case of a light event still for 10sec at the mailboxes. Even if you assume 18min delay, it means a vehicle was stopped by the mailboxes soon before GZ calls.

  40. June 28, 2013 at 10:45 AM

    hard to tell what the state’s strategy is here. they showed one clip from the kitchen video and I MISSED IT but it may have been a car passing. Then, yes they showed the car that trolled the mail kiosk. But not the same car continuing down TTL, seemingly disaapearing around the bend and returning to face the mail kiosk.

    I am hoping they did this to force GZ onto the stand, at which time they will THEN show the car returning shot from the pool cam.

    Dunno. Lots to think about.

    Maybe all they are gonna go with is the trolling the mail kiosk,and not the more hard to prove BARD returning to face the mail kiosk.

    • June 28, 2013 at 11:40 AM

      Willi: “Maybe all they are gonna go with is the trolling the mail kiosk,and not the more hard to prove BARD returning to face the mail kiosk.”

      So why showing the image of the vehicle thru the kitchen window?

  41. wassointeresting
    June 28, 2013 at 11:06 AM

    I’m trying to channel my thoughts to BDLR to ask John when he says “it looked like a ground and pound” that the words “looked” or “that’s what it looked like to me” means that’s what he INFERRED, and not what he actually saw.

  42. June 28, 2013 at 11:28 AM

    Johnathan Goode x-exam was very interesting. Here are my notes. It is long…

    John Goode with BLDR
    Tall vertical blinds always closed. Could not see out through blinds. Watching TV in living room. Coutch against left side of the wall. Glass door to the left. Heard faint noise outside. Could not tell direction. Could not make out anything other than noise. Could not make timing. The noise was getting closer. Could not tell if 1 or 2 individuals. Went to the sliding glass door. Cracked the blinds 1st. Light outside was on. Screen obstructed view through the blinds. Peek thru one vertical blind. Could not see anything except 1 guy or something. Wife was on the phone with technology group or something. He stepped outside against wife’s advise. Took one step outside with 1 foot inside. Look like a tousle, vertical to him. He did know what it was. Yelled “Stop it”. Few seconds for him to get outside. Vertical meaning making a T with sidewalk. He could not tell 1 or 2 people. What he saw was moving. Not far from the concrete. Noticed 2 people. The color of clothing on top was dark. Bottom was red. Position changed quickly (within 10sec could be as little as 3sec possibly). Could tell the person at the bottom had a lighter skin color. Describes a straddling position. Person at bottom was face up. Saw harm movement shoulder down. Could not hear the person on top was striking. Possibly the person on top was holding down the person at the bottom. Yelled loudly: “What’s going on? Cut it out. I’ll call 911”. He did not hear the yells for help when initially stepped out. They said something after he said something. Could not say who was saying something like “Help”. JG heard 1 or 2 helps. Then they moved up on the sidewalk. He thought it was serious and went back in. When he stepped outside the tv was muted. When stepped out he saw nobody else. He did not notice any other witness even inside their houses. He could not see a gun.
    John Goode’s tape is played.
    Recall saying MMA style means straddle position. He did not see the person on top slamming the person on the bottom. He did not see head slamming over and over again. The cries for help on the recording did not sound the same as what he heard. It was dark outside. Nasty weather outside: rain on & off.
    Recall hearing a gunshot while he was dialing 911. He corrects: gunshot when he was on the line ready to get picked up. Did not focus anymore on the cries for help when back inside. States 1 or 2 cries for help when stepped outside. Sounded the same voice for both cries [so he heard multiple].
    John Goode strikes me as a rational individual. He has a large neck : must be exercising. He knows about MMA sport.
    With MoM.
    JG requested anonymity for concern for safety. Heard noise in the distance. Could not tell direction. Muted tv. Heard noise again but getting closer. Turner tv back on and off again. Did not keep track of time. Went to sliding glass door. [missed a part]. Sidewalk 20ft from back porch’s slab of concrete is possible. 1st view: They were lying on the grass. Guy on top facing down flat on the person at the bottom. When he moved to sidewalk: The person on top was now on his knee straddling GZ on the cement. [missed a few] JG watched for 8 to 10sec. Saw harm movement going downward from straddle position on the sidewalk. TM was on top. It looked like TM was raining blows at GZ. He could see them from the side with GZ right side to JG and TM left side to JG. Rationally speaking he believes GZ was screaming for help. He did not see TM slamming GZ’s head on the cement. He perceives the screams differently live vs audio. He is not certain GZ was the one yelling for help. Using common sense the yells were from GZ. JG cannot relate the yells he heard with the ones on the tape. No one stopped. No one acknowledge JG was there after he yelled at them. He could not see a gun. He did not see GZ trying to stand up. He saw GZ wearing red or white. JG recalls filling out a statement. He clarifies that the person was yelling help when getting hit. Recalls telling news the guy at the bottom getting beat up. Thought it was a dog fight very initially. JG would not have recognized GZ at the time. Doesn’t recognize clothing. About his sketch: (1) is initial view, (2) is on the concrete, (3) is after he saw TM’s dead body. Saw LEO flipping TM’s body. Saw John Manalo with flash light. Looked from bathroom window (he believes). When JG says “Holly shit” this is when he just saw the body. Saw 2 guys with flashlights [check time line again]. Porch light does not illuminate much far away from porch. One person voice and opines that it was GZ’s.
    Back with BLDR
    Initially lying horizontally on top of eachother. On cement TM is straddling GZ. Not same questions at every interview. JG states “Ground and pound” coming from JG. JG reads his statement and could not find “ground and pound”. JG used “Ground & pound” with Serino 1st. JG says he was trying to give better visual. Porch light illuminates the concrete slab. MoM concerned about impeachment of JG. [JG is now red and sweaty!]. Used MMA from his tv experience to give a visual explanation. He could ne see blows. JG believes that the person on the bottom was crying for help. FG did not see any ones mouth. Did not hear a muffle. Did not see GZ’s hands. Cannot say if GZ was trying to get up. He thinks that any 1 at the bottom would be trying to get up. States that he was not lying initially as his initial statement does not contain information in the later ones [this is to keep DeeDee in]. Is not practicing MMA.
    Back with MoM
    JG admits of adding information thru his statements. There is a phone interview with Serino. Deposition is 50 pages. MoM tries to help clarifying that changes does not mean lie. MoM tries to say that TM beat up GZ but he says no he clarified that he saw no punches. MoM reads statement to Serino. Shows the “ground and pound” was coming in that statement. JG maintains the MMA & “G & P” is referring to position no punches.
    Back with BDLR
    Confirms that JG clarifies that he saw or hear no punches.

    • ada4750
      June 28, 2013 at 1:48 PM

      I missed part of it Did he say how much time it took between the moment he went back inside and the gun shot?

      Anyhow, his exaggeration in his infamous TV interview comment (MMA style punches) caused a lot of damage. What could be a self-defense response from Trayvon became a savage attack for many and also in Serino’s mind.

      I am concern also about colors. Red in darkness looks almost black. I am surprised that so many people identify the red color. Also, Trayvon had a hoodie. For sure it was not up anymore, but still nobody asked W6 if he saw a hoodie in the back on the person on top.

      • June 28, 2013 at 10:30 PM

        John Good has been clear that he is not a time watcher. I personaly don’t blame him for that. I know many think otherwise.

        I appreciate how this guy is rational enough to criticize his own initial statements and dismiss them has being just 1st impression given by his brief witnessing of the struggle on the ground. I like that aspect of him. He says it clearly that he believes TM was punching GZ but since he could not see or hear any punch, his belief is only based on his tv experience of MMA.
        This is really important that a witness can question his sense and revisit rationally what he really witnessed.
        I believe MoM lost him. He hoped he could twits that has JG being too afraid of telling the truth. He clearly stated concerns but he also clearly stated what he saw is different from what he feels. I’m fin with that.

        • ada4750
          June 28, 2013 at 10:53 PM

          Yes he is honest. But still, I wish he recognizes the important damage caused by his first interview and statement.

  43. June 28, 2013 at 2:39 PM

    We got Ayala’s route wrong. I’m afraid we’ll have to go back to the drawing borad.

    • June 28, 2013 at 4:18 PM

      I noted that too

      • June 28, 2013 at 5:59 PM

        No need to go back to the drawing board. We got Smith’s route right and I found Ayala’s car already. We’re good.

        • June 29, 2013 at 3:54 PM

          That’s what I figured would happen. His arrival is only part of the sync point logic.

          I wonder why the state is so easily reliant on the assessment of others when it isn’t right, and the obvious proof is on the camera footage for all to see.

  44. June 28, 2013 at 3:03 PM

    We got T. Smith’s route right!!!!! This is major. I looked to the correlation table and found Ayala coming in 30sec after Smith. We are dead on with the timing of the videos!!!!

    • amsterdam1234
      June 29, 2013 at 4:16 PM

      Yes, and Raimondo testified he drove his car onto the cut-through, to get some light at the T. We got that right, the light coming from RVC that we can see in the eph, about 30 sec after the car we thought was Raimondo’s, entered the front gate. We are spot on with the timing.

      • June 29, 2013 at 5:30 PM

        You’re referring to the phantom light seen at the EPH video. Indeed, we thought that would be Raimondo lighting the T and that’s exactly what he testified.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 5:36 PM

          Yes, the phantom light. I forgot that’s what we called it. We got the time right.

  45. June 28, 2013 at 3:15 PM

    My notes concerning Jonathan Manalo

    Jonathan Manalo
    With BDLR
    Was in living room assembling coffee table. Wife on couch. Around 7:10 heard groans through window. Wife check through window. And said people fighting. He told her to stay out of the window. Heard gunshot. Never looked thru window. After hearing gunshot went outside after grabbing a flash ight. Went out thru garage door on RVC turned to the left to cutthrough path way. Saw GZ walking toward him near the T. Manalo had his flashlight on. Noticed GZ had a cell phone to his hear. Noticed blood down his nostrils on his lips. Saw blood on the back of his head. Took pictures using his cell phone. Took of GZ’s head, TM’s body and tactical flashlight. Used his flashlight to take pictures. [BLDR show route on map]. Both met at the T. Back porch light was off and tuned on after. Was the 1st to get in contact with GZ after gunshot. Police arrived after. GZ was squatting when back head picture taken. TM’s body picture is the way he found him with hands under body. No one touched the body as a far as he is concerned. Picture of flashlight also taken. Did not see TM moving. Hands were under torso. When saw GZ, he asked “call 911?” He answers “no”. It appears to him GZ was in a fight. GZ was answering with no troubles. Asked about caliber. Answered 9mm. Polce arrived. T. Smith told GZ he will handcuff him. GZ gave his cell phone to J Manalo to call his wife. Showed his gun by putting his right harm up inside his waistband holster. GZ said fine about being handcuff. J Manalo picked up his phone call wife and put it in his leftside pocket. GZ gave wife’s #. He talked with her. Had a connection right away. Said “Your husband has been involved in a shouting, …” GZ cut hjim off and saifd “Just tell her I shot someone” . J. Manalo executed himself “Ok well, he just shot someone”. Claims it took n=him 20sec [not right] to get around building. Remained outside when ofc arrived. Helped by providing a bag to assist ofc pluging TM’s gunshot wound. Never met GZ or TM. Not involved in NW program. GZ did not appear to be in shock. He was just like any normal person. GZ appeared calm.
    West turn:
    Wife said 2 guys fighting. JM hear noise move from north to south. He heard a shot. Made the decision to find out. Walked carefully with flashlight. At 1st did not see TM’s body. 1st attention was not little flashlight. Did not turn to call the police. GZ wanted JM to tell his wife. GZ asked JM about bleeding. Try to get JM to agree that GZ squatted to collect himself. JM is not fan of “collect himself”. This is when JM took the picture of the head. GZ told him: “this guy was beating me up, I was defending myself and I shot him”. Ofc. Timothy Smith arrives with a flashlight. JM doesn’t remember the flashlight. GZ complied fully to ofc orders. GZ called SZ. GZ is going to be taken into custody. GZ: Just tell her I shot someone. West want JM to agree that GZ tried to tell he was not shot. Tries to imply GZ being responsive was he way to be shocked. JM never attends the hoa. West want to depict JM as selfish. Illumination in TM’s body is from JM’s flashlight. JM was standing on sidewalk to take picture of TM’s body near the T a few feet south. [West keeps on getting advices from MoM] The place of the picture is where he encountered GZ.
    BDLR:
    TM was coherent compliant calm. GZ was erect. No problem speaking. GZ responded to JM questions. JM never saw anything prior to getting out.

    • June 28, 2013 at 10:04 PM

      I only got to hear the first part of BDLR asking ?s but it seems like BDLR wanted to limit the scope of his questions and that, like I always felt, the two people spoke at greater length than just what he’s saying here. Was that anyone else’s impression?

      He also seems to confirm that Tim SMith was at least somewhat giving preferential treatment to a fellow white dude. The fact that GZ seemed to be holding his cell phone, and didn’t get ordered to drop it immediately seems curious.

      I also finally clued in somewhat to the reason why he asked about the caliber of the weapon – he was probably wondering if there was a chance the teen was still alive or not. Had he been shot with a small caliber weapon he might only have been wounded.

      Curious about how GZ got his cell phone back if, as Tim Smith testified, he led GZ off to the patrol car immediately.

      • June 28, 2013 at 10:09 PM

        I don’t know if Jon Manalo would have rushed. This guy is not in the altruism thing. This is an angle MoM is visibly trying to take advantage of and I cannot blame him for doing that.

        • June 28, 2013 at 10:55 PM

          Still, it’s chilling to think that they stood there while that poor kid bled to death, chit-chatting about guns. I think that even though it’s after the shooting, it still speaks to the “depraved mind” aspect of the M2 charge in some way.

      • June 29, 2013 at 4:49 PM

        Okay I watched all of the Jon Manalo testimony and cross. We’ve only heard part of the total picture here. Each side limited its questioning and we’ve not seen a stry to finish accounting by him of all he witnessed.

        Also very interesting to see that he spoke about things that Tim smith did that weren’t covered by Smith’ own testimony -starting with the very strong suggestion that when smith arrived he did not have his gun drawn at first. At least the way Manalo tells it he walked up and (presumably as try body ) and then asked which of them “did this,” and then disarmed GZ and politely told him he’d need to cuff him as a formality.

  46. June 28, 2013 at 3:16 PM

    My notes concerning Ofc Ayala…

    Ofc Ricardo Ayala
    GUY:
    11y at SPD. 6y at investigations prior to 5y at patrol. Responded to TM’s shooting. Dispatched at ~7:15pm. Less than 5min to get on scene. Was the 2nd ofc on the scene. On map: Ayala turned right all around RVC. Saw Ofc. Smith. Ofs smith had GZ at gun point when he arrived. Ayala focused on TM on the ground. TM was face down hand under body. Gave commands to TM (see hands). TM never responded. Raimond approached Ayala. Raimondo checked pulse. Both flipped TM from stomach to back. TM never responded. After TM was moved, he saw the gunshot wound underneath the button. Plastic bag provided by civilian. Saw no sign of life from TM. Ayala did chest compressions. Rescue responded to scene. TM was pronounced dead at the scene. No more involvement after.
    MoM:
    Heard that T. Smith just arrived as in got in complex. Less than 2min to get to T. Smith. MoM asks if appropriate not to ask drop cellphone. Gun with flashlight. Focussed on protecting T. Smith. T. Smith secured GZ and took him to his vehicle. Did not look at GZ’s face. Did not notice the blood on GZ.

  47. June 28, 2013 at 3:17 PM

    My notes concerning Stacy W. from SFD..

    Stacy Willington[?]
    SFD . Dispatch at 19:21. Arrv 19:27. Ofc already on scene when arrived. SPD ofc with TM giving CPR. TM was on his back. FPD checked TM for pulse on his neck. No pulse. Moved clothing, lifted shirt. notice something in front of his sweatshirt. Felt like a can. Did not examine the can. Detect a small bag in sweatshirt. See GSW in chest. Put on cardiac monitor. TM pronounced dead at 19:30. Never heard TM making sounds. Did not take items on or off TM or around TM.
    After TM treated GZ. GZ was sitting in police car. Talked to GZ. GZ could understand her, she could understand him. Glascow Common Score (GCS) explanation. Highest GCS = 15. GZ was 15. It indicates that GZ was fine for eye, motor and verbal. GZ nose was swollen but not bleeding. 2 Lacerations on the back. Not bleeding. Cleaned up all injuries for better view. GZ stood up with no balance issue. GZ treated for ~5min. Determined that SPD would take care of any required treatment.
    MoM:
    GZ was in the back of police car. She treated GZ herself. Nose was very swollen. They may have swept blood before picture. Laceration on the nose. Swollen nose consistent being consistent with punch? : possibly. Blood on tip of nose. Blood from inside nose. Indicates injury in the nose. When on the back, blood from the nose would be swallowed. Laceration on the back not actively bleeding. Concern about head injuries. Cannot get x-ray in EMS truck. Conclusion of discussion was police has to do any additional care [including x-ray?]. Confirms GZ was able to stand up. Doesn’t recall GZ was handcuffed.
    GUY again:
    Would not make a determination of brain injuries based on GCS.

  48. June 28, 2013 at 3:18 PM

    One big input from today is the gunshot hole underneath the photo pin!!!

    • June 28, 2013 at 10:52 PM

      That was known before. Had you not caught that? I’m not sure what exactly it may prove. It seems to me that it confirms the gun was pressed to the hoodie.

      perhaps that ties in with the idea that the shirt was pulled away from the body forcibly, but I dunno. I guess we will find out.

  49. June 28, 2013 at 3:20 PM

    Another interesting input. That one is from T. Smith. He used spotlight to see all the way up the dogwalk path and saw 1 man standing.

  50. June 28, 2013 at 3:23 PM

    My last outlined input is from my friend Johnathan Goode: He saw two men with flashlight.
    Jon Manalo is one. We need to check the timing on his tape to understand if the 2nd man is T. Smith or if GZ also had a flashlight.

    • wassointeresting
      June 28, 2013 at 6:16 PM

      In my opinion, John Goode is a very imprecise witness. I’m not saying that I don’t believe what he says. It’s just that his descriptions of timing always seemed to be off. Officer Ayala came on scene fairly quickly after Smith, so either he just looked out right when Ayala had gotten there but it was more likely he was so focused on looking at the body that he didn’t see Ayala coming up behind Smith, and/or didn’t think to describe it that way. Just said “saw a couple of guys with flashlights”

    • wassointeresting
      June 28, 2013 at 6:21 PM

      Oops disregard what I said. You were talking about Manalo and Smith, not Smith and Ayala. But I still do think Good is imprecise.

    • June 29, 2013 at 1:06 PM

      The audio timing on the sec-cam video is precise. Good says he sees two men with flashlights well before Smith’s arrival. So either the two are Manalo and Zimmerman, or Good is mistaken.

      • June 29, 2013 at 2:09 PM

        That’s what I had in mind. That makes the idea that GZ dropped his flashligh near the more probable. In any cases, there are so many witnesses testifying about the loud argument taking place by the T that it does not matter much.

      • June 29, 2013 at 6:25 PM

        Manalo says GZ dropped his cell phone when smith disarmed him.

        Elsewhere he has also spoken about seeing the lighted keychain flashlight on the ground. Can anyone make sense of how all this transpired? Was the second flashlight in his hand with the phone?

        When is anyone from the prosecution going to point out that Every time the defense shows that bloody head photo they are showing the jury a picture of a man making a phone call seconds after killing someone.

        Or will it turn out he was trying to call the police?

        Long ago the city of Sanford released some records related to the calls to police but when the special prosecutor took over they asked the city to stop making them available.

        Does anyone recall this, and the possible suggestion floted at that time GZ had called police BACK and hung up after the shooting? It was a very very short call.

        It’s frustrating that the purpose of a trial isn’t to get ALL the facts out in the open.

        • wassointeresting
          June 29, 2013 at 7:09 PM

          I do recall a phone call from GZ’s phone at 7:20 while sifting through the actual evidence logs. I had dismissed it at the time because it seemed too late to be the “phone call in the bloody head picture”. However, I think the times have been adjusted since then, and if we give the system one minute leeway one way or the other, it might be it. I think Jon Manalo’s phone picture was at 7:19 and some change, right?. But if GZ had made the phone call back to the police, then I would have thought they (the defense) would make sure to let us know about it somehow by now to dispel the theories that he was indifferent or acting inappropriately after the shooting.

          I couldn’t find the actual logs quickly so here’s just a listing from an article way back when. The curious thing though is that 7:20 call was a duplicate of the previous call. I don’t know if the system automatically makes a “duplication” if they get a call back from the same number that they had just logged.
          http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/george-zimmerman-s-history-of-911-calls-a-complete-log.html

  51. June 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM

    My notes concerning T. Smith…

    T. Smith

    Guy:
    Responds to dispatch after 7pm for suspicious person from 1.5miles. Update while in route as shot fire. Address 1231 TTL while entering the gates. Used gate code from dispatch. Came in by front gate. Down TTL to 1231. Went down TTL to 2821 RVC. Used spotlight to shot down the dog walk and saw 1 person standing outside. Continued to RVC roughly behind Manalos. Saw 2 people standing by~ TM and TM on the ground. TM was face down could not see hands. Did not approach TM b/c in contact with GZ. GZ did not appear to have troubles standing balancing. Ask GZ if he saw what happened. GZ answered he shot and was sill armed. Could not see GZ gun, hands when approached him. Walked GZ to car. GZ had no problem walking. Ayala went to attend TM. Raimondo was 3rd. Not wearing gloves when handle gun in certain way. Secured the gun, remove the magazine and locked the slide to the rear. One round ejected and collected. Secured everything in patrol vehicle until gun box. Submitted in evidence. ID’d the gun in the gun box with his hand writing. GZ had bloody nose and laceration to the back of head. Was not aware of JM’s pictures. Was jacket pushed off in any way? Don’t think so. Back of jacket was wet and had grass. Nothing about pants with back wetter than front. Took GZ to police station. 15minute drive. GZ claimed felt dizzy. GZ did not appear having trouble balancing. GZ walked with T. Smith throughout the station. Saw no blood in patrol car after GZ was gone.
    Has been ofc since 2005. Wanted to be a cop since was little. Could see 1 person up down the dogwalk way from south end. Did not know the scene was just by the T when he arrived. GZ was ~30ft down from the T close by TM. GZ was standing. Do not remember any other person (besides JM). Asked GZ 1st what he has seen what happened? Asked if he saw who shot. GZ answered “he did”. Held GZ at gun point. GZ did not challenged T. Smith. GZ leaned over to the side with harms raised to show gun. That was enough to reveal the gun. T. Smith doesn’t recall seeing cell phone in GZ’s hand. GZ did not resist. Took the gun bare hands and put it in his own clips. No concern about GZ. Saw back of the head injuries while securing GZ. Did not see GZ agitated. T. Smith did not find GZ’s behavior strange or unusual. Ayala came 2nd. Control of GZ became his task. GZ told him that he was yelling for help and no one came to help as they were walking to the car. GZ said it again while in the car. GZ said that with confused face. The back of jacket was noticeable more wet than the rest and there was grass on the back too. Jean appeared darker on the back. [missed a bit]. GZ was handcuffed as he was treated by EMTs. Called supervisor Sgt McCoy to talk about GZ’s feeling light heaed. MoM suggested SPD decided not to treat him for cost reasons. At the station, GZ cleaned himself up with water and tissues.
    Guy
    Does know if gun was visible in the dark.
    MoM
    No question in T. Smith that the gun was at GZ’s right hip when he lifted his right harm

  52. June 28, 2013 at 5:49 PM

    My notes about Lindzee. Very incomplete as I was disturbed quite often.

    Dr. Lindzee Folghde physician assistant
    BDLR:
    Works at Altamonte practice from Aprl 2011. GZ was her patient.
    Object concerning GZ’s medical record. Jury & wit are out. MoM claims not relevant. Sidebar…
    Obtained history of GZ when he came to her on Feb 27th. GZ’s race was white. 1:21pm. Difficulty with falling in sleep. Exercises intensively with MMA (Mixed Martial Art)but does not help. Patient to establish care. She had contact with GZ in person. GZ was involved in MMA 3days per week. [lost the feed] . About Feb 27th @ 11am. Brief history taken before discussing. GZ is here for return note for work. Pt was in fight on Feb 26th. Pt was punched to the nose and had 2 lacerations on the back of his head. Pt states EMT stated that his nose was broken. GZ gave his account of the events. Complains of nasal pains. Review of symptoms: Denied headach, change in vision, slurs speech, dizziness. Admits nausea when thinking about the violence and denies nausea comes from abdominal factors. Admits tenderness on SI. Denies tingling at extremities. Denies double vision. Admits to nose pain. But denies hearing loss. Denies palpitations, chest pain, shortness of breath, vomiting. Admits to head trauma but denies tingling, …. Denies suicidal thoughts. GZ is able to function fine. If he had complains, she would have pushed with physical exams and possible imaging. Based on what GZ told her, she had less concerns. General appearance: he is obese. He is alert and responding. Meas of head trauma 2cm & 0.5cm. Review of lacerations: Skin were well approximated => no sutures. Lacerations =~ cut. Eyes are OK [my sum up]. No other trauma noticed to the head. Some bruising to the labial folds. No blood in the nose. No blood in the nose. Is nose was straight. Tender left SI. Lodine given for SI pain. Had a large band-aid on the head. He told her that EMT told him about having a broken nose. She could not say he had a broken nose. She believes he had a broken nose with no deviation. Scalp laceration require no stitches. Likely broken nose. The scalp is very vascular and therefore bleeds more.
    MoM [very quick at standing up]
    [missed some] GZ’s face picture at police station is similar to what she saw in person. MoM shows Wagner’s face photo of GZ. She expects that the swollen nose healed within hours. Depends on what was used to heal. She does not think the nose bone was protruding. Swollen due to blood or fluids. Likely bleeding inside the nares. If on your back the blood can go in the throat and be swallowed. Swelling is body reaction. [missed some more] Discuss if the head smashed in cement can cause bleeding in the brain under the skull. She says yes [of course, does not need Md for that answer]. Discuss abrasion to the right temporal. Rough surface can cause that. Can be caused of many other reasons. [missed some more] Bio signs: GZ has a bit high blood pressure. Pulse high. BMI shows he is obese. Does not mean it is not athletic. SI injury can occur through a fall… The definitive way to determine broken nose when no deviation. Hence her recommendation of ENT. She counseled psychologist. Discuss black eyes. Says it takes time [hours-day] for those to appear. Bandage was fine given shallow lacerations.
    BDLR
    Skull is not perfectly shaped. Cannot tell when those bumps were made. She saw just and only 2 lacerations. The swelling was gone by the time she saw him. She says GZ was neurologically intact. GZ was already established a psychologist.

  53. June 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM

    The 2 new inputs from GZ’s PA are:
    1) GZ had a Psychologist,
    2) He told her he’s training MMA 3x per week.

    For the rest, only idiots believed his head has been beaten up to a pulp. So, it was not news.

    While it is hard, at this point, to grab the importance of the Psy thing, the irony with the news about MMA is mind blowing.

    • wassointeresting
      June 28, 2013 at 8:54 PM

      “All I found that these red lights keep moving back and forth, aside from that this thing seems to have no function whatsoever, sir”
      …..
      “Sir, these lights keep blinking out of sequence sir. What should we do about it sir?”
      “Get them to blink in sequence!”

      That is HILARIOUS!!!!

    • ada4750
      June 29, 2013 at 12:57 PM

      I wish BDLR asked the physician assistant more questions about the cuts. The smaller one is almost on top of the head. No way, it could be done by smashing his head. If is was the case, the injuries would be on the sides of the head or in back close to the neck.

      The second, is still a little too high i think, But more, It is a straight cut. A bashing would do a more circular wound. The vertical angle shows the same thing.

      The only way, it can be done is by edge of the sidewalk if GZ was parallel to it. John G. said he had this position at a moment. So, it is yes possible that Trayvon pushed GZ on the edge, but if it was during a struggle for self-defense. At some point, it looks like they were both in a self-defense situation. Trayvon was in self-defense all along but not GZ because he was the aggressor. That’s the crucial difference.

      • ada4750
        June 29, 2013 at 12:59 PM

        but it was during a struggle for self-defense

        • wassointeresting
          June 29, 2013 at 4:28 PM

          No offense to the physician’s assistant who had been in practice for just about a year with what is the equivalent of a master’s degree, She sounds intelligent and I’m sure she’s good at what she does, but she’s not a forensic/medical examiner. Her job is to TRUST her patient with complaints and act on that. Any “consistencies” that she agrees with shouldn’t lend much more weight than if anyone else with some common sense had looked at GZ up close. By the way, no one asked her if the “black eyes” that GZ had could have been from lack of sleep. We saw him the next day too on the re-enactment video and he did not look like a raccoon.

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 4:58 PM

          Prof Leatherman expects that BDLR will bring others medical experts. I hope so.

  54. June 28, 2013 at 8:44 PM

    It was a rich day today.
    The first witness showed again that SPD screwed up their analysis of the cctv. Voila. they claim 18mins.
    The interesting thing though is that Mantai showed 2 sections from the cctv.
    I’m not sure where the state is going with those samples but one thing is certain, MoM had an immediate allergic reaction.
    He went straight to questioning the timing of the cctv. I have to say that I agree with him on that one. However, i know his goal is to dismiss the videos as of any inyterest while I know it is exactly the opposite. The funny thing is that he tries dismissing them by arguing their timing. It indicates that 18min late may, after all, be good enough to tell a story. In that story a vehicle stopped 10sec by the mailbox kiosk soon before the NEN call was placed and no other vehicle is seen minutes before and minutes after. It can only be our friend GZ.

    • June 28, 2013 at 9:41 PM

      What was the first clip? If it was the arrival of an emergency responder, then it’s there to establish, like it was done by this group, that the “sync point” was a certain known event.

      I’m just getting off from work – watched almost the whole day on my cell while working and listened when I couldnt see the screen.

      I guess my first question is always going to be “how does this affect the car to pedestrian chase” aspect of the prosecution’s possible strategy. Any guesses? It takes me a while to wrap my brain around all this 18 minute thing. I know what the REAL timing should look like.: he trolls the mail kiosk and as he drives to near W11’s to turn around and settle in to the facing the kiosk position he’s calling the operator.

      • June 28, 2013 at 10:04 PM

        The 1st clip is GZ’s truck thru Kitchen window. I don’t believe this is accidental.

        • June 28, 2013 at 10:15 PM

          I keep wondering if this is the tip of an iceberg somehow. I’m not enough of a armchair lawyer to know how it all works, but it seems like BDLR may be hoping to put only a LITTLE of this out there at present in order to get the defense to go out on a limb when it’s their turn to present evidence and witnesses (GZ himself, possibly.) Then, on rebuttal he could lower the boom with the REST of the clubhouse video clips, such as the “never in the front parking lot” and the “doubling back to face the mail kiosk” clip.

          Or else he’s just trying to keep it simple so the material is presentable to a jury of “housewives” who probably are not as attuned to what can be seen, or how it all fits together, as a bunch of “nerds” like us. Of course that’s a gross oversimplification of both groups but I hope I’m getting my point across.

          Keeping the presentation so very brief didn’t give MOM much room to challenge the material, and IMO the rebuttal was worthless. MOM wanted to say the timing may not be prefect in order to CLAIM reasonable doubt” but we know that no matter if the timing is not quite right there simply aren’t any other cars around to say a different one is George.

        • June 29, 2013 at 7:07 PM

          Accidental in what sense?

          I’m wondering if its “accidental” that the doubling back is omitted or not. In a weird was I feel like showing just those two short clips were a “shot across the bow” meaning a warning the defense that there is more to come if the defense were to try “the kamakazi strategy” of not presenting any case at all after the prosecution rests but instead simply makes a motion to dismiss followed by their own closing argument that the state failed to prove its case.

    • June 29, 2013 at 1:11 PM

      The appearance of Smith’s flasher in the Pool Hall video only establishes the time of his arrival when synched to W3’s 911 call. The State did not include W3’s call on the list they validated, not has she been called to testify…

      • June 29, 2013 at 2:06 PM

        Is W3 on the witness list?

      • June 29, 2013 at 8:21 PM

        Good point. But MOM only worked on cross to get the technician to say it could be a minute off. If the state can present the material to the jury in a manner that demonstrates no matter which way the video is synced THAT is GZ trolling the mail kiosk – either it’s him or he was never in a car at all- then it’s going to damage his credibility a great deal but more importantly, it’s going to corroborate RJ/ W8 / dee dee’s account.

        Even if the state never ” gets” the car to pedestrian chase or presents the map GZ drew , the jury heard the story of the creepy guy who followed trayvon from the mail kiosk and scared him into running away.

        The state is building a case brick by brick. Lets hope they know how to stack bricks together.

  55. June 28, 2013 at 10:08 PM

    The MMA thing is just too much irony for one day. If that was the ONLY thing I learned today I’d still be blown away. I’ve got zero idea on how it will affect the JURY, but it certainly puts the “zimmerman supporters” on the blogs to shame, and it says a lot about how the defense and the Z family like to operate. Can you say, “more hypocritical than a philandering televangelist?” Oddly however this may not mean as much to a jury that genuinely was not following the publicity surrounding the case.

  56. June 28, 2013 at 10:15 PM

    ada4750 :
    Your estimate margin of error is few seconds? How come the state’s expert can not give any margin error? Maybe somebody else will do (like Ofc T.Smith) Maybe also the state called this guy because he doesn’t know so he could not give the exact delay to the defense. They keep it for later if necessary.
    18 minutes would mean that GZ was already on phone when he stopped at the mail box.

    The state expert went visiting the clubhouse only yesterday per his own words. It tells how much efforts they put in it.

    No with 18min, the nen call starts soon after the vehicle leaves the mailbox kiosk.
    With 16.5 minutes, the nen call starts whie a vehicle seems to be parking on TTL facing the mailbox kiosk.

    • wassointeresting
      June 28, 2013 at 10:26 PM

      “The state expert went visiting the clubhouse only yesterday per his own words. It tells how much efforts they put in it.”

      Wait, that witness was only the guy who worked at the security company. I think his testimony was only to introduce the videos and to confirm that the timing was off. He wasn’t the one viewing those tapes for evidence. He’s not law enforcement. It’s kind of like Diane Smith who was the evidence technician. She was up there to set the stage to say “yes I took those pictures” “yes, those are evidence markers”. He was there to say “Yep the timing was off and it should be such and such.”

      • June 28, 2013 at 10:30 PM

        Right, but look what the state was able to do there -the defense only tried to say they could be off a minute in either direction. They were NOT able to say, they are the wrong day, or the videos are unable to show anything at all, etc. In other words, MOM knows he can’t prove that the videos aren’t dynamite. Whatever else is coming, he can’t fight the idea that they are showing what happened.

        • wassointeresting
          June 28, 2013 at 10:46 PM

          West had a confused look on his face when he was previewing those clips before they showed them to the jury. Maybe it’s O’Mara’s strategy to let West crossexamine when the state talks about those videos again. It might take the state a half hour to make their case, but then West will swoop in and put the entire jury in a deep coma for three hours replaying those blinking lights over and over, all the while waving his hands in a confused daze to distract them.

        • ada4750
          June 28, 2013 at 11:04 PM

          I think wasseoint… is right. The guy was a dummy (excuse the word). I can’t imagine they didn’t figure a way to set up the time or thought that it is not important.

        • wassointeresting
          June 28, 2013 at 11:17 PM

          I wouldn’t so much say that he’s (Good) a dummy, But listening to his interview with FDLE was excruciating when he was describing how the bodies were positioned. And today, all that business with the vertical and horizontal. The way he described it initially was as he put it “that’s what it looked like”. He has a hard time coming up with accurate descriptions, so he used the best analogy that he could think of “MMA style” to describe straddling. But by that time, I think he was already tainted with his own imagination. I think the best description of what he saw in real time was his own 911 call, when he said, there were people behind his house “wrestling”. He didn’t say a guy was getting beat up, he saw “wrestling”.

      • ada4750
        June 28, 2013 at 11:33 PM

        Sorry wassointere… I was talking about the technician for the Club House cameras. Dummy is not the exact word.

        But it is true that John Goode has difficulty speaking clearly. Just like me!

        • wassointeresting
          June 28, 2013 at 11:42 PM

          Oh ok, may be you mean the video guy was just not “polished”.

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 12:29 AM

          wassointere True, he was not polished! But i meant something else. He was like a set (an actor who takes a hand accessory to the story)

    • June 28, 2013 at 10:27 PM

      That’s good enough for me. I think the estimate by this group may be a lot closer to reality but just so long as a jury sees that TROLLING the mail kiosk part they are getting a great corroboration of RJ/DeeDee’s story at least, and a great counter to GZ’s re-eneactment video if that ever surfaces.

      I half expect Serino to be called to speak to the “re-eneactment” video and say that the whole time he was trying not to laugh out loud. He would be asked about the parking in the clubhouse parking lot and possibly give answers about how the timing of the NEN call doesn’t allow for that to be true.

      Then TC Osteen (sp?) would be the narrator who presents the significance of the clubhouse videos, and shows the other clips as well, possibly.

      At least that’s one way they could lower the boom and wrap up the prosecution’s turn with the strong message that GZ is not a credible person and his story starts at least with a pack of lies and impossible claims.

      Remember that since the very beginning – at the BOND hearing BDLR got GZ to say under oath that his story was NOT filled with inconsistencies, lies and contradictions. GZ said NO under oath and BDLR seems to have knowledge of the way to prove he was lying under oath in his own court case. To me this would be the way to finish up the state’s case before the defense’s turn. Then in closing arguments he would tie the whole false narrative stuff up with a ribbon.

  57. ada4750
    June 28, 2013 at 10:38 PM

    The evening following Rachel’s first day. I expressed some concerns (others than West). The day after, Rachel’s strong performance against West calmed them. Maybe too fast, i am afraid we might see Rachel again. I was very scared before her testimony. I was euphoric after, maybe too much. There is too many unexplored points and one of my concern is already on spot.

    This trial is a real roller-coaster. Seriously, i think i should cut off the news and check in a month. But i can’t.

    • June 28, 2013 at 10:48 PM

      I think the basic question a juror might ask themselves is, “is this girl smart enough to make ALL that up?”

      I think at minimum she blows his story of where and how he first saw TM out of the water.

      If the prosecution is savvy enough, she also very strongly cooroborates the car to pedestrian chase which establishes intent and aggression and destroys GZ’s credibility even further than just the weird timing of the NEN call, and the supposed doubling back to circle the vehicle” which I assume the state could present.

      My worry is that the state is hoping to leave out ALL the statements to SPD in order to try to force GZ to take the stand, but he still doesn’t take the stand and the defense simply pushes to say at closing that the state never proved its case.

      There is some sort of high stakes poker going on but I’m not enough of a legal expert to know what it is.

      sadly, Fred Leatherman has not been commenting on strategy much. Some speculate he has a health issue this week. Dunno. He was my go-to with questions about how the legal system works and what the strategy stuff might be.

      • ada4750
        June 28, 2013 at 11:27 PM

        This is paradoxical. The first day i thought (like many), she can’t make that up it is impossible. But her “weakness” was a concern to me for others aspects.

        The day after, she looks much more confident and we were just very happy to see how she held against West. But it means also that she is quite brighter than first thought and therefore the possibility of a make up raises. The prosecution needs a little extra to corroborate her testimony. The Club House cameras can be it.

        This means that the prosecution should enter SPD statements.

        If the trial was finishing today, i would bet for a non guilty verdict. Proof too weak. Let’s see.

        • Gracie
          June 28, 2013 at 11:37 PM

          There is no way Rachel could have made that stuff up. When she said “I didn’t want to stay in the closet that long” I thought I was going to die. Who the hell makes that up? I think she came across as very credible to the jury. She lied (not under oath because she wasn’t under oath with Crump) but she explained it. Her explanations made sense.

        • ada4750
          June 28, 2013 at 11:52 PM

          “I didn’t want to stay in the closet that long” I forgot that line. Yes this is hard to invent. It shows also that she liked Trayvon a big deal. Her eyes were illuminating when she was talking about their new friendship.

          Sure she sounds credible. Everything is holding. The state needs just a small corroboration.

    • Gracie
      June 28, 2013 at 11:43 PM

      I got depressed enough, after this week, that I went back and listened to Guy’s opening statement again. That cheered me up. I think the best is yet to come.

  58. June 28, 2013 at 10:54 PM

    I have updated the photo album (http://imgur.com/a/bcAII) with:
    1) The new correlation table showing which vehicle is Ayala’s.
    2) The new time line showing DD’s call times
    3) I have added at the very end the pictures of TM’s photo pin with the gunshot hole behind.

    • wassointeresting
      June 28, 2013 at 10:59 PM

      By the way Tchoupi, unless that picture of W08 that you have really is Rachael from some time ago (I’m very bad with faces so I can’t tell), do you think that you should remove it now?

      • June 28, 2013 at 11:08 PM

        I made a quick fix. Thanks for reminding me about stupid mistakes.

        • wassointeresting
          June 28, 2013 at 11:47 PM

          No problem. I would love to be a fly on the wall and find out if either the prosecution or the defense ever paid any attention to your website.

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 12:08 AM

          WOW splendid page. I saw it quickly almost a year ago but i forgot about it. I will study it closely. Bald Headed Dude knows about your page?

    • wassointeresting
      June 29, 2013 at 12:57 AM

      @Tchoupi, you seemed so fascinated by the bullethole under the pin today. I had heard about that some time ago. Have you seen this little clip? Kinda hints at maybe GZ was holding TM’s sweatshirt, perhaps stretching it out, when he fired. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7_zMYiswAc

      • June 29, 2013 at 11:26 AM

        The hole-behind-the-photo-pin was totally new to me yesterday. When was it outed?

        I’m wondering how it is possible. I would guess that hypothesis have been floating around. Could you tell me?

        • nemerinys
          June 29, 2013 at 12:01 PM

          tchoupi – On page 2 of the second discovery, from Ricardo Ayala’s witness interview:

          Martin was flipped over and Ayala saw a gunshot wound on his torso under a photo button that Martin was wearing.

          We know that the gunshot holes were matched in both Trayvon’s shirt and hoodie in such a way that contradicts any suggestion that gravity and/or the soda in the hoodie pocket caused the different locations of clothing holes and gunshot wound. That the photo button was found unmarked over the wound is the final confirmation that Zimmerman had clutched and pulled down both shirt and hoodie while taking aim and firing.

        • June 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM

          Thanks Nemerinys

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM

          The holes in the two shirts were aligned, but they were misaligned with the gunshot wound. The holes in the shirts were about 3 to 4 inches higher and inch to the left of the gunshot wound in the chest. Most likely scenario is that GZ pulled both Trayon’s shirts with his left hand, and shot with his right hand. He must have pushed the button out of the way with his gun.

          LLMpapa made a couple of good videos about it. Too bad he also speculates that they were standing when the shot was fired. But the misalignment part is well done.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 4:48 PM

          There are 4 parts. Part 2 and part 4, will tell the story.
          Here is part 2

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 4:50 PM

          And here is part 4

  59. Gracie
    June 28, 2013 at 11:52 PM

    I’m anxious for the person from GZ’s gym to come testify. What’s he going to say? GZ got a year and half of training and all he could do was make fly swatting moves in self defense? That would kill the gym’s business.

    • wassointeresting
      June 29, 2013 at 12:06 AM

      “GZ got a year and half of training and all he could do was make fly swatting moves in self defense? That would kill the gym’s business.”

      According to the defense he was doing “aerobic exercise”. I dunno, maybe in addition to MMA classes, they also teach Jazzercise.

      • June 29, 2013 at 11:37 AM

        Defense said that indeed.
        How funny that GZ would choose a fight club so far from home over tens of exercise clubs close to home just for aerobic.
        Then he would fill in the registration form stating that he wants to train for being a cop.
        Finally, he would literally tell his PA that he trains 3x per week for MMA.

        Whether he did just aerobic or he did MMA, it shows that this man has a problem with telling the truth. He cannot give the true answer to simple questions.

        • June 29, 2013 at 7:21 PM

          Tchoupi, iirc, it was further clarified to 3 x 3 hours per week… and that’s not your usual “keep fit” activity, methinks !

      • June 29, 2013 at 5:31 PM

        Jazzercise… nah, don’t look like a jaz guy to me, more like he would be learning sambacise or merenguesise. ; – )

        I seem to recall Bernie in redirect tried to clarify with the PA that MMA was the aerobic exercise GZ was doing, but I’m not convinced Bernie is right and I don’t think PA clarified anyway, because iirc defence objected as out of scope.

    • June 29, 2013 at 12:26 AM

      “fly swatting moves” only. No, Gracie I am now convinced that just as the witnesses who saw the middle part of the scuffle saw, GZ was underneath holding on to Trayvon as hard as he could with his legs and arms using grappling techniques, while being dragged by Trayvon this way and that trying desperately to get away but with GZ’s weight, the 204 lbs, holding him back and while GZ’s stupid head was being dragged on the ground causing him the bumps and small abrasions he ended up with. And I believe that unable to hold him any longer, with time running out, furious at his banged nose which may have been caused, not by Trayvon, but by GZ walking into a tree while looking for him, and furious that this little whippersnapper was not bowing to his authority and screaming like hell trying to get away, GZ, with time running out, went for this gun, and without Trayvon probably even knowing, aimed, and fired straight through his heart.

      No Gracie, no “fly swatting moves”, indeed no moves at all, but like a pit bull, a bulldog, or staffy with jaws that never let go, GZ hung on there with all his might to stop this fucking punk and asshole from getting away… permanently!

      • Gracie
        June 29, 2013 at 12:33 AM

        I think they were both standing in the beginning but GZ took him down with a kick to the inside of the right knee (and left a dirty scuff mark doing that). There’s a closeup photo of the dirt in the last photo release. There are also 10 missing photos from TM’s shirt in that set. I wonder what they show?

        • June 29, 2013 at 12:38 AM

          Yes, that could well be how GZ downed Trayvon, with a kick.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 5:11 PM

          Which photo is that Gracie? I never considered the possibility GZ used a sacrifice throw, until yesterday when I found out he got quite a bit of training in MMA. I checked to see if MMA uses this judo technique, and they do.
          With a sacrifice throw, you get your own body in a disadvantaged position, by falling on your back while holding your opponent. There are throws where you place your foot on the hip, and one where you place your foot on the inside of the thigh of your opponent. If you don’t do it right, you will end up on your back with the other person on top of you. Let me go find a video.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 5:33 PM

          I think he may have attempted to do something like this

      • Gracie
        June 29, 2013 at 12:35 AM

        Oh — and I think GZ got hit in the nose with the gun after he fired his shot — either the gun or the cartridge.

        • June 29, 2013 at 12:44 AM

          That is a real possibility because GZ could only shoot with one hand needing the other to hold Trayvon in front. One hand with a normally two handed gun, one it appears has a large recoil precisely due to its small size and light weight as there is little mass to absorb the jolt. Yes, that is a real possibility.

  60. Gracie
    June 29, 2013 at 1:01 AM

    I’ll have to start posting here. I see some names I recognize from Talkleft and the old JQ board (I never posted there). This trial is totally frustrating to me because I’d like to see GZ convicted of manslaughter at a minimum. I made up my mind a long time ago that this wasn’t a self defense case.

    • June 29, 2013 at 12:16 PM

      Like justice quest and Talk left, there are a core group of regulars here. But by all means, welcome to the site.

      Unlike TL, we won’t ban you for speaking the truth. Unlike JQ, we aren’t going to shut down the thread randomly, I hope.

      If you want to “keep up” be sure to watch whonoze’s 47 minute video that explains a great deal of what gets discussed here. We do talk trial strategy but the focus is usually discussing “what really happened?” judging by a rigorous examination of the evidence that is in the public domain.

      We don’t usually talk about what the media is doing, except when it introduces new evidence or new information that may have a bearing on what can be surmised about the true events of the night in question.

      Speaking only for myself, I made up my mind that GZ lacked credibility when I heard his proxies tell the story of being struck to the ground by a sucker punch while walking to(wards) his truck, but then seeing the location of the body in a tv news video from the night, weeks in advance of his arrest. It seemed very clear this man was telling a self-serving story that didn’t match the evidence. That basic idea has been added to by almost every revelation of more evidence and testimony we’ve seen. Eventually it became clear he chased the teen with his car before chasing him on foot, and the pattern emerged – when in doubt George leaves it out, and what he did, he blamed on the kid. Then later it became clear to this group that he never saw the teen on RVC at all, and only found him when the teen was waiting out the rain under the mail kiosk. His entire story is a pack of sloppy lies, but so much of it happened with only a dead teenager to contradict him, and a simple Miami teenager who was on the phone to refute it by recalling as best she could the conversation they had that night. Amazingly enough, her account is corroborated to the second by the forensic evidence and deductive reasoning. She even confirms the car-to-pedestrian chase where her questioners have no idea that she is doing so, both from the State attorney and the defense counsel. Utterly maddeningly, no one points this out but me and a few others here on this site. HE CHASED THE KID WITH HIS CAR and that’s exactly why the teen ran off the roadway and into the proverbial dark alley – to get away from an aggressor who had yet to begin the foot pursuit.

      What happened in the “missing minutes” and how the physical struggle began, only the killer knows, and absent a full and credible confession, we will never know. Many things are possible. What GZ claims happened is not possible.

      I’m willing to trust the process to go along as it has been (reserving the right to scream at my computer screen and throw my drinks at the television in frustration on a daily basis) and when all the information that we are gonna ever get is out there, THEN I’ll full decide on my own version of “what likely happened.” There are going to be a lot of grey areas we’ll never know about, because a lying coward killed an unarmed teen senselessly and has told an utterly proven to be false narrative in the wake of the tragically preventable incident.

      I also think the state has the ammunition it needs to get a murder 2 conviction if they present the case well enough.

      • June 29, 2013 at 1:11 PM

        Talking about the car-to-pedestrian chase, I reviewed the the Kitchen video one more time yesterday evening and found soemthing with a bit of interest. This time I took a different approach Though.
        I made a screen grab of every instances of event through the kitchen window. That way, I could see how many frames an event takes and in how many instances I could see a piece of the passing vehicle.
        The results are:
        1) In all but 1 case, events take 1 or 2 frames.
        2) In all but 1 case, the image of the vehicle seen through the window consists in the headlight or taillight with a bit of the corresponding frame.
        3) The image of a vehicle that we suspect being GZ’s truck is the exception in 1 & 2.

        Now you have to keep in mind that the view angle on RVC is very narrow and that the camera’s sampling rate is very low (1 frame/sec). So, we expect seeing mostly the lighting of the street caused by the passing vehicle. If we are luck, the frame shot can be right at the time the vehicle is in the narrow view range of the camera through the window. Hence the few instances of vehicles captured by the camera. Now physics tell us that the probability for the camera to grab an image of the passing vehicle goes up as its speed goes down. So, the # of frames is a representation of the speed of the vehicle with slow vehicles being more likely to generate an event spanning more frames and being more likely to get its image taken.

        The exception is the vehicle we always believe is GZ’s. It’s event lasts 4 frames. Most events last 1 frame. Many last 2 frames. None but GZs show two images of the vehicle. GZ got 2 frames of the headlight beam, 1 frame of the headlight picture & 1 frame of the left rear panel.

        Conclusion, that vehicle at that moment was at least 2x slower than any other vehicle captured that night. So, either TM was in view and being followed, or GZ knew what he was looking for and found it by the mailboxes.

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 1:35 PM

          Definitively! It sure looks like GZ was there on a tip. GZ passed a first time slowly passed over TTL and came back near a minute later.

          Let say GZ answered a tip (i still point Taaffe, sorry whonoze!). He only knows that Trayvon should be around the Club House. So first he passed slow looking for him and can’t see him. So he continued along RVC probably up to where the street changes orientation but with a faster speed. No sign of Trayvon looking south on RVC. He concluded that he must have passed him. Turned around and come back. He saw him the second time.

          There is a lot of vegetation between the Mail box shield and RVC. On his way back he could get a much better view

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 1:51 PM

          I point Taaffe for three reasons.

          — Rachel said Trayvon took a shortcut. it has to be near Taaffe.
          — GZ mentioned it (the shorcut) also. Not that he saw Trayvon himself there, but he could have got it from Taaffe. Taaffe added that Trayvon is now walking towards the Club House.
          — Taaffe himself. His non-stop involvement from the very beginning can be motivated by the money but also because he feels guilty.

        • June 29, 2013 at 8:27 PM

          The depth of your analysis always amazes me tchoupi. You and the main bloggers here have shown such patience, consistency and determination.

          When Mantei presented the two videos, one of the kitchen and one with the mailboxes, I lit up, because as I watched the car wheel drive by in the kitchen window, and car lights go past the mailboxes, I knew those precise sections must have been chosen apropos, and that therefore they were aware of the evidence the videos contain, so I could not help but think that they probably only knew because of the extensive work this group carried out from the start, and still not satisfied, has continued to improve on ever since.

          I so hope all of your work bears fruit for Trayvon’s sake, and I will it to do so from the depth of my being, because, although I may be of the opinion that this case will in the end boil down to those last minutes and GZ’s scurrilous claim of self defence, anything and everything that can expose GZ’s abhorrent behaviour from when he first saw Trayvon up to the moment when he took his life, as well as expose the unconscionable lies and deceit he has spawned once Trayvon could no longer speak, so that he not only stole Trayvon’s life but has continued to take from him since, stealing his memory as well as his screams, can never be superfluous if we are to pull in a guilty verdict for what is, imo, a very difficult and complex case.

  61. June 29, 2013 at 11:43 AM

    Gracie :
    I’m anxious for the person from GZ’s gym to come testify. What’s he going to say? GZ got a year and half of training and all he could do was make fly swatting moves in self defense? That would kill the gym’s business.

    He has to tell the truth to the best of his ability. I may be wrong but he probably has been called as witness already. My views are that people going regularly to fight clubs are more likely to end in some sort of violent altercation than people going regularly to chess clubs.

    Unless…

    • amsterdam1234
      June 29, 2013 at 5:50 PM

      You found a video with crazy Dutch people.

      • June 29, 2013 at 8:08 PM

        Are you suggesting it’s hard to find crazy dutch people?

        • amsterdam1234
          June 30, 2013 at 4:38 AM

          Au contraire, mon ami. Au contraire.

  62. Gracie
    June 29, 2013 at 3:02 PM

    Next question for this trial: Who did Zimmerman call right after the shooting? He didn’t call his wife. Did he call 911? Did he call his buddy Mark? Did he call his father? He SHOULD have called 911 so, if there is a missing 911 call out there, this should be very interesting.

    • ada4750
      June 29, 2013 at 4:04 PM

      I was wondering also. But it still can be his wife. From what w13 said, it looks like T. Smith interrupted GZ’s call. All the possibilities are open.

      • Gracie
        June 29, 2013 at 4:28 PM

        W13 (Jonathan?) said that GZ was on the phone when he first saw him. If he had been on the phone with his wife, he wouldn’t need W13 to call his wife to tell her that he shot someone. It had to be someone else.

        There is some information that hasn’t come out yet that I am dying to see like GZ’s cell phone records.

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 4:40 PM

          Was GZ talking? I mean maybe i had just dialed and was waiting for an answer. I know it is stretched. It should come out at the trial.

      • June 29, 2013 at 5:05 PM

        I reckon it was his wife. West in cross dropped the hint GZ had “tried” to call his wife, and JM testified GZ wasn’t actually “talking” on the phone but only had the phone to his ear, so it appears most likely GZ never got to make a call. West’s in cross indicated that this was the why GZ asked JM to call her for him dropping (West) tossing (JM) the phone onto the grass just before or while being cuffed.

        • Gracie
          June 29, 2013 at 5:40 PM

          West “dropped” a lot of things in cross that we know simply aren’t true.

        • June 29, 2013 at 6:37 PM

          If you are referring to their arguments for the case (i.e. Trayvon looked suspicious, attacked GZ, bashed his head on the ground, tried to kill GZ, GZ had to kill him in self-defence, and all the details surrounding it), I agree, they have “dropped” a lot of clangers but not surprising as they can hardly argue the State’s case! However, whether their version “isn’t true” is what the jury gets to decide while we poor folk can only speculate.

          Apart from their case arguments I don’t know what else you are referring to, because I can’t recall any of that sort. But they will look look pretty stupid, if they can look any more stupid, if they deny something that is so easily debunked by a b&w telephone record against which they can have no argument.

          In any case I was going more on JM who very firmly corrected West about his not having said GZ was “talking on the phone”, it made me think that it may well be that GZ never got to make that call even though he intended to… poor little Georgie ; – )

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 5:45 PM

          We Will find out soon enough. I can’t wait to see those phone records.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 29, 2013 at 5:48 PM

          He did have some time to make a call. Jane had him up and walking at 7:17:42. Manola made the photo where GZ had the phone to his ear at 7:19:07.

        • June 29, 2013 at 6:12 PM

          You are right he did have time, but JM was so firm in his answers, even correcting West about GZ not “talking on the phone”, and he was near enough to hear, that I won’t pin hopes on their being one.

          I agree with your previous reply. I can’t wait to see the records either. It will either be one less thing to worry about or one more thing to work on, either way, I can take that in my stride, it’s the unknowns that are killing !

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 6:00 PM

          West is a snake. He often asked question and if the witness says i can be sure of that, he will continue later like if the witness answered he/she was sure.

        • June 29, 2013 at 6:25 PM

          Ooops ada… I think you must have meant “I can’t be sure of that” !

          If the case then I agree entirely… I think it’s probably the only way they get the evidence to fit ! And is it only only West, because I seem to recall MOM doing similar even if to a lesser degree.

        • ada4750
          June 29, 2013 at 6:36 PM

          Ooops You got it gbrbsb. West is confusing me.

        • June 29, 2013 at 6:40 PM

          And me too… in fact after Thursday I was not convinced I was going to watch another day in direct again!

  63. June 29, 2013 at 8:25 PM

    One new piece of info that came out yesterday: Timothy Smith testified that he pointed his spotlight up the dog-walk as drove by the South end of it on TTL. He said he saw a single figure standing. I wonder how this fits in with the precise timing of events. Did Smith shine his light before Jon Manalo arrived on the scene, or was Jon already there and Smith didn’t see him? Did Jon see the light coming up the walk (those police spotlights are pretty hard to miss…)? Regardless, we now have a pretty good idea when GZ would have known the police were arriving, and that he would have how much time it was going to take the officer to get from where the light had been cast up to the T.

    • June 29, 2013 at 8:40 PM

      That’s impossible. Jayne sees GZ up at 7:17:42. Then she sees Jon Manalo @ 17:17:48.
      At that time Ofc T. Smith was still discussing where to go next. He got 2821 RTL only after 7:18:00 when W19 called.
      So I expect T. Smith to get at the south of the dog walk no sooner than 7:18:20.

      Timeline: http://i.imgur.com/aDg2M9qh.png

      • amsterdam1234
        June 30, 2013 at 4:47 AM

        I was wondering about that. Jane saw Jon, when he turned left on the cut-through. John says he sees someone with a flaslight at 7:18:15, W19 mentions seeing him at 7:18:16 and Mary Cutcher at 7:18:19. If Smith was looking north after 7:18:20, there should’ve been 2 men standing near the T.

    • unitron
      June 29, 2013 at 8:47 PM

      “Regardless, we now have a pretty good idea when GZ would have known the police were arriving, and that he would have how much time it was going to take the officer to get from where the light had been cast up to the T.”

      He would perhaps have been able to estimate how long it would take the officer with the spotlight to arrive, but had no way of knowing if that officer would be the first to arrive, and it would have been unrealistic to expect only one cop after a gunshot.

      • June 29, 2013 at 9:08 PM

        Hey Unitron. I missed your views. What are your views about the trial so far?

        • unitron
          June 29, 2013 at 10:03 PM

          “What are your views about the trial so far?”

          It’s early days yet, but at least we’re getting some questions answered, or getting better, more detailed answers, like where were the headphones, did Manalo call Shellie on George’s phone or his own, what was the deal with the letter Francine helped write, why wasn’t the gate cam working, stuff like that.

          We’re also getting new info that raises new questions, like does George’s choice of gym to work out at mean he got serious MMA training (and if so can he get a refund, because if you’d pulled them apart just before the shot and looked at both you’d never have said George was winning the fight), or witness 8’s apparent lack of worry about whether or not she was completely truthful and forthcoming in her initial interview with Crump, and what, if anything, does that say about the reliability of rest of her testimony.

          And I’m wondering if things so far are really going as less than splendidly for the state as it appears or if that’s just a temporary optical illusion.

          I’m sure the state and the defense both still have a lot up their sleeves which we have not yet seen.

        • June 29, 2013 at 11:02 PM

          hey Unitron, you are making an assumption that the fight was about who was “winning” or one person “besting” the other. I don’t think either party was necessarily trying to best one another at “fisticuffs” at all. There was no scorecard, no judges and no bell to announce the end of rounds.

          Instead, GZ was likely trying to detain the teen, restrain the teen from escaping and HOLD the teen for the police. As Amsterdam points out, he could have gotten all those injuries by having held on for dear life while Trayvon tried to rise and “get off.” The nose injury may have been frmo a head-butt, the only option TM had as he crawled on all fours, moving the two from grass to sidewalk and back.

          Trayvon’s goal was stated : get off of me, you creedy guy. He wanted to run away, was in the process of running away or had recently been doing so, just as GZ was in the process of trying at the least to make sure the police had a chance to confront the “suspect,” and at the other end of the spectrum he may have wanted to confront the teen himself, as evidenced by his words: what are you doing here?

        • unitron
          June 30, 2013 at 2:38 AM

          “hey Unitron, you are making an assumption that the fight was about who was “winning” or one person “besting” the other.”

          Not really, I was illustrating my point about him deserving a refund if he was supposed to have been getting intensive training in actual MMA fighting.

          To put it another way, pull them apart just before Zimmerman reaches for his gun, look at them and tell me which one looks like the guy who’s had MMA training and which one looks like the guy who hasn’t but was in a struggle with someone who has.

          Unless there’s some special stealth MMA move that involves utterly defeating your opponent by inflicting a small abrasion on his ring finger and waiting for infection to set in or something.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 30, 2013 at 5:11 AM

          Oh Unitron
          Still so selective. If you read what GZ wrote on the application about his goals for going to this particular gym, it says training for law enforcement career. GZ was training grappling techniques. Taking someone down to the ground and restraining them. His problem is that he was not law enforcement, and Trayvon was not committing any crime, when GZ took him down.

          Now that I know that GZ had received intensive training in MMA, I am quite convinced he took Trayvon down with a sacrifice technique, going down to the ground yourself and pulling the person with you by the force of your body weight going down. You better have your muscle memory trained enough, to automatically chuck in your chin and fall slightly sideways, because if you don’t, you are going to hit your head on the ground.

          You also better be trained and confident enough to steer your opponents body with your arms and your foot placed on the hip or thigh of your opponent while falling backwards.

          People love doing this technique early on in their training, but they often fail, ending up on their backs, with their opponents pulled on top of them. And if they are not on a grappling floor, their failure to control the position of their head, may be punished with an injury to the back of their heads. That is what John saw. John fails to mention how they moved to the next position, that is why I know he is lying.

    • June 29, 2013 at 10:02 PM

      I had just been watching a small section of JM’s testimony again and read this. If it helps: a) JM did not come out the back onto the dog walk, he went out through his garage onto RVC and walked, not ran, down the cut though, i.e. toward TTL; b) he was already there when Smith arrived, c) he was asked and stated he saw Smith but not his torch which he attributed to having the light of his own torch.

  64. June 29, 2013 at 10:17 PM

    I have a new post up detailing why I think the Wagner photo of GZ’s bloody and “broken” nose has been manipulated:

    https://whonoze.wordpress.com/2013/06/29/wagner1/

    And another post speculating about why it may have been altered, and what will happen with it at trial:

    https://whonoze.wordpress.com/2013/06/29/wagner2/

    • June 29, 2013 at 10:21 PM

      interesting stuff. While we are discussing the trial however, should we stay on this thread or move to the latest?

      • June 29, 2013 at 11:20 PM

        Stay on the trial threads for general discussion. Leave the threads under the posts about the photo for comments pertaining to that issue alone.

  65. June 29, 2013 at 11:15 PM

    tchoupi, myself, Tzar and a few others have opined over at The Lounge that Rachel Jeantel has a developmental disability, perhaps what is now called an Autism Spectrum Disorder, and was until recently called Asperger’s Syndrome. In response, a flurry of posts have “defended” Rachel against such “accusations”, and attributed her behavior in court to everything from Cultural Difference to a history of Haitian poverty, to English not being her native language, and what not. This irks me for two reasons.

    First, as I have a fairly close relative who is an “Aspie” of the same age as Rachel, I absolutely refuse the idea that recognizing symptoms of such a thing is insulting or deprecating to Miss Jeantel in any way. Quite the contrary, those who see any discussion of a medical genesis of her behavior as denigrating her are perpetuating the stigma that there is something “wrong” with ASD kids or kids with mild “mental retardation” (I’m sure there’s a new term for that now, too, though I don’t know what.) There isn’t. They’re just different. They process information differently. They think differently. They act differently. They are simply incapable of understanding certain social norms, and more importantly, incapable in the moment of picking up the subtle cues of voice inflection and body language that clue the rest of us in on how to act in social settings. Their unavoidable violations of decorum bring these kids a lot of grief, especially when their condition is undiagnosed (as I have the feeling Ms. Jeantel’s might be.) Perpetuating negative stigma about developmental difficulties is just piling on, and worse increases the likelihood that parents remain in denial about their children who have these issues (“not MY kid”), which results in the kids not getting proper counseling (or perhaps proper meds) and other associated problems…

    Second, on a more pragmatic level in terms of the trial, I don’t think for one minute a jury of older white ladies is going to be forgiving of behavior they would attribute to the Cultural Difference of the Caribbean immigrant African-American community in Miami. If they see Rachel as a “normal” 19 year old kid, I believe they are much more likely to judge her harshly, and more likely to disregard her testimony. Whether that is right or wrong on some absolute moral scale is besides the point. I hope at lest one member of the jury has a relative or friend of the family who has developmental issues, or has worked with such kids in a professional capacity and can set any jurors who do not have such experience straight during deliberation about the likely source of Rachel’s seemingly “odd” manner. It’s not that ASD kids are incapable of lying or withholding the truth, per Rachel lying to Sabrina about the wake and about her age, but they would be, in my experience anyway, incapable of weaving the kind of complex web of deception attributed to “DeeDee” by the CTH and the TalkLeft forum gang, much less of holding up such a deception through six hours of cross-examination.

    IMHO, the media are doing Rachel (and the public perception of the prosecution’s case) no favors by dancing around the question of Rachel’s manner in court and in social media. And dancing they are. This is not at all surprising given the widespread social stigma against anything listed in the DSM, regardless of biological causality. The news features I’ve seen on her testimony — most notably a piece and commentary on the Lawrence O’Donnel show — have cautiously excluded any clips of her mumbling, back-talking, mis-understandings and so on. If her behavior and persona are mentioned at all, (and they weren’t by MSNBC) they’re couched in certain code words like “unfiltered” or “unsophisticated.” Those are fair enough descriptions on the face of it, but they don’t get to the heart of the matter. WFTV legal commentator Bill Sheaffer tries to read the pluses and minuses of each witness for each side. His take on Rachel was that, on the one hand, her behavior could be seen by the jury to completely undermine her testimony and turn into a debacle for the State, but on the other hand, the jury could also take her “unsophisticated” presentation as a sign of authenticity and general truthfulness. I think he’s right: the jury could go either way on Rachel. I think she’s telling it like it is from her point of view, and while her point of view may have flaws, all in all her testimony is no more flawed than any other of the witnesses we’ve heard. But I probably wouldn’t believe that if I hadn’t had experience with my ASD cousin, and an ASD student who was in a couple of my classes just before I left teaching. Thus, my hope that the jury “gets it” and doesn’t read Ms. Jeantel the wrong way.

    • ada4750
      June 30, 2013 at 3:52 AM

      I totally agree with your perception of Rachel as well as the one the public in general may have.

      I was, like many, saying that w8 will have a very hard task to establish her credibility. Her silence will have to be explained in a credible way. Rachel did it fairly well. It is not uneasy to believe her.

      Her lack of sophistication and social manners was a plus because we believe her much more easily. A very sophisticated person would not be able to justify that kind of silence after the death, unless that person has a extreme imperative reason. But it is quite difficult to imagine such reason. Being an illegal immigrant would be one but Rachel is not.

      Regular followers of the case knew the credibility challenge w8 would face but the general public forgot the context. O’Donnel, for instance, sounded a somewhat disappointed by the general outcome of Rachel because he doesn’t realize that a sophisticated w8 would not have been credible.

      All this is why i wrote that Rachel’s testimony couldn’t be better.

    • amsterdam1234
      June 30, 2013 at 5:35 AM

      An Aspie would not have been able to sit through 4 hours of excruciating cross examination, and keep it together.
      I think your own biases may be speaking. As to the white older ladies on the jury, they may had to get used to her, but I think the condescending, insulting treatment Rachel received from West will be noted. All women, no matter wat their color or background is, recognize the arrogant misogynist, who will humiliate and denegrate a woman’s intelligence to win an argument. That she was able to endure that kind of treatment without biting his head off, and without ever changing her story, will be noted by any woman unless she is a card carrying racist.

      • June 30, 2013 at 9:26 AM

        And just what biases do you think I have, other than my bias against people who think there’s some sort of shame associated with kids with developmental disabilities?

        I do not argue with the contention that West’s treatment of Rachel was not only condescending, but played to racist, classist, and misogynist stereotypes. Alas, all women do not recognize these pathologies. There is no shortage of XX folks in the GZ fanbase, and no doubt SZ and GZ had not not one drop of sympathy for Rachel as West attacked her.

        I don’t know what testimony you were watching, but while Rachel may not have bitten West’s head OFF, I saw some pretty big bite marks on his cranium.

        (BTW, my dear ASD cousin is African American, just so you know.)

        • amsterdam1234
          June 30, 2013 at 10:57 AM

          I don’t want to get into an argument with you. We all have biases. I’ve known and worked with people on the spectrum. Rachel read West like a pro. The attack he placed on her early during the second day cross, and the way she was able to block it, realize what he was trying to do to her, and to stay calm and focussed, is just not something I would expect someone who is on the spectrum to be able to do.
          We don’t know anything about her life or the environment she is living in. She may have been sick or through other circumstances, wasn’t able to finish highschool earlier.
          All I know that there is this young girl, who is thrown onto the national stage, where she was facing a man who was practicing law before she was born and who is demeaning and hostile towards her, and there is no one who can help or advise her. Taking all that in account, I saw a very intelligent young woman, who won from West, because she had better grasp of the details, did a better job in reading West than vice versa, and in the end outsmarted him, because she was able to keep her concentration better than West.

          We are not psychologists and I just don’t think it is appropriate to label her as deficient in anyway based on some general ideas. You can’t judge her unless you know how she functions in her own environment.

          As to your biases, I was talking about your insights as to how older white “ladies” think. You are free to express your opinion, I just think it has so many generalities that its conclusion loses its meaning.

          Just my opinion.

    • June 30, 2013 at 11:14 AM

      I have not change my opinion concerning Rachel Jeantel.
      Again, I’m not mocking Rachel in any way. To the contrary, it makes me admire her courage even more.
      I can be wrong as I’m no specialist. However, I have some experience teaching kids with the type of issues we’re talking about. None of those kids were severely handicaped since it was just a program to help teenagers with various issues that do not require medical or judicial assistance. In the end, watching/listening to Rachel made me think about the few I worked with. And, I have always admired their courage in facing their challenges.

  66. June 30, 2013 at 4:06 AM

    To put it another way, pull them apart just before Zimmerman reaches for his gun, look at them and tell me which one looks like the guy who’s had MMA training and which one looks like the guy who hasn’t but was in a struggle with someone who has.

    Neither of them looks one way or the other. The question is reconciling the SOUND of the screams with the VISIBLE evidence showing no wounds besides the gunshot on TM, and only minor scrapes on GZ. (i’ve been cut worse than that on my head, and bled more than that as a result, and I barely made a peep other to curse my own stupidity for carelessness with my Dremel tool… don’t ask for the details, because I won’t tell.) Best conclusion: the screams were in response to something that does not appear on either man’s body. Best hypothesis I’ve encountered: GZ had TM in a pain inducing hold, which he could have learned from several sources — his MMA gym, his bouncer buddies, or Mark Osterman.

    • Gracie
      June 30, 2013 at 5:02 AM

      Regarding the cuts on the back of GZ’s head — he had to be on top at some time because of the direction the blood flowed.

  67. June 30, 2013 at 11:02 AM

    unitron :
    “hey Unitron, you are making an assumption that the fight was about who was “winning” or one person “besting” the other.”
    Not really, I was illustrating my point about him deserving a refund if he was supposed to have been getting intensive training in actual MMA fighting.
    To put it another way, pull them apart just before Zimmerman reaches for his gun, look at them and tell me which one looks like the guy who’s had MMA training and which one looks like the guy who hasn’t but was in a struggle with someone who has.
    Unless there’s some special stealth MMA move that involves utterly defeating your opponent by inflicting a small abrasion on his ring finger and waiting for infection to set in or something.

    Thanks Unitron for your inputs. I always appreciate them.
    I like the thought exercise about pulling TM & GZ apart a second before the gunshot but in the end it is flawed.

    If the question is “looking at both guys after you pulled them apart, which one had MMA training?” then anyone with no knowledge of the facts would answer TM.
    However, the question implies that one of the 2 had MMA training and used that skill during the fight. The simple fact that we finally find out that GZ claimed being trained in MMA fighting just proves the point that insinuating that one of the two was trained for MMA fighting is misleading.

    If the question is “looking at both guys after you pulled them apart, which one can’t stand being tickled?”. The answer would be GZ. But, it would imply that it was just a kid game that turned bad and that GZ hurt himself while on the ground. Right?
    However, I’m pretty certain that anyone can write about how it was just a kid game based on the forensic evidence we know today. If you want to take that challenge, keep in mind that both guys are alive but won’t talk, and that SPD & SFD came and collected the evidences that we know today.

  68. June 30, 2013 at 11:48 AM

    I just don’t think it is appropriate to label her as deficient in any way based on some general ideas.

    Deficient, eh? I rest my case.

    • amsterdam1234
      June 30, 2013 at 1:04 PM

      Whonoze I am not going to argue with you, and we are not in court. I still think it is inappropriate to diagnose Rachel as having autism, based on what you consider “different” behaviour from other people that have been on the stand.

  69. June 30, 2013 at 12:32 PM

    amsterdam1234 :
    I was wondering about that. Jane saw Jon, when he turned left on the cut-through. John says he sees someone with a flaslight at 7:18:15, W19 mentions seeing him at 7:18:16 and Mary Cutcher at 7:18:19. If Smith was looking north after 7:18:20, there should’ve been 2 men standing near the T.

    I wonder if T. Smith could have really seen all the way to the north of the dog walk. Could it be that the person he saw was Austin running back home after he grabbed his dog?

    • amsterdam1234
      June 30, 2013 at 12:54 PM

      No Austin would’ve been home by then. He had his dog back on the leash and started walking back towards the T, when he heard the shot. He ran home after that. That is more than 1 minute.
      GZ may have been blocking Smith’s view, if Jon was standing north of GZ on the dog walk. Or Smith just doesn’t want to admit he saw 2 men, because he never mentions seeing Jon at all.

      • June 30, 2013 at 1:03 PM

        And yet, his sister’s call would only be placed at 7:19:04.

        • amsterdam1234
          June 30, 2013 at 1:30 PM

          She called the nen not 911, she may have been on hold. But of course it is possible.
          I think Smith suffers from selective blindness. He never mentions Jon in his narrative, and he testified in court that he didn’t see Jon when he arrested GZ, eventhough Jon said, he was putting GZ’s phone in his pocket while Smith was handcuffing him.
          I think they neglected police protocol, but all sides appear to agree to not implicate the SPD.

      • June 30, 2013 at 7:34 PM

        John was somehow invisible. There are TV shots of him standing around well inside the crime scene tape, bot on his own and with groups of cops. Not one of them mentions having seen him. He just may have been the person (un-named and un-described) who was asked to leave the taped area, ages after…..but nobody mentions seeing him earlier. Just invisible or a non-person who doesn’t count worth mentioning.

  70. June 30, 2013 at 4:16 PM

    I still think it is inappropriate to diagnose Rachel as having autism, based on what you consider “different” behaviour from other people that have been on the stand.

    First, ASD is far from full blown autism, and they changed the DSM to that terminology because Asperger’s isn’t a clearly defined “syndrome” and ASD can come in a variety of degrees.

    Second, I base my observations not on the difference between Rachel and other witnesses, but the similarities between Rachel’s behavior in and out of court to the known characteristics of ASD especially as exemplified by my cousin and my former student.

    Third, it is a straw-man rhetorical inflation to claim I ‘diagnosed’ Rachel. I never presented myself as anything but a lay person with a little bit of knowledge of the subject. My observations are necessarily not definitive, as i am not a trained medical professional.

    Fourth, you have failed to address your own apparent stigmatization of individuals with developmental ‘disabilities’. (The terminology is that of the medicla and legal world, not mine.)

    If you really don’t want to argue with me, you might try not arguing with me…

    • amsterdam1234
      June 30, 2013 at 5:07 PM

      Ok

    • wassointeresting
      June 30, 2013 at 7:02 PM

      @Whonoze, FWIW, I understand what you’re saying. I am also not a medical professional, but I do have some educational background in psych and I have studied up on ASD due to my own son’s diagnosis. Technically, he was diagnosed with classical autism because he had a speech delay when he was younger (and still does have speech problems to some extent). He is in a “regular” school and is doing well academically. He’s not Rainman, but he is quite a nerd (was an early reader, memorized the multiplication table on his own in 1st grade, does math tests for fun). Yet, if you were to meet him, at first, you might think he’s a bit immature for his age or “slow” because of his speech. While he can speak in full sentences and enunciate words clearly, he has a hard time searching for words, and stutters at times. Yet he has great eye contact and a great sense of humor. In any case, while the difficulties that kids/people on the spectrum have are wide-ranging, I would say that they all have trouble with communication, either in reception or execution. The severity of the communication problem doesn’t necessarily correlate with the person’s cognitive abilities, and truly, no two people with autism are alike. “ASD” was an attempt by the medical community to lump them all together, so the diagnosis could be made more easily, but it all seems rather arbitrary to me.

      Many people mistakenly identify the term “autism” to be synonymous with “mental retardation” or “developmental disability”, which as you stated are clinical terms, but unfortunately has a social stigma with them. It is this residual social stigma that gave people, who are well-intentioned, the knee-jerk reaction that they did to your assessment of Rachael. As a mother of a child with autism, i don’t take offense to the these terms of disabilities or deficiencies, as I do recognize that my son has real difficulties that he needs help with improving to better function in a world where social relationships require effective communication. In fact, I do think it is OK to say my son has a disability, after all, he needs speech therapy. (No different than getting physical therapy if he had problems walking.)

      However, not all communication problems are due to autism. With Rachael, I don’t see that she generally has any trouble executing her thoughts, just that she keeps having to remind herself to speak more loudly and to enunciate more clearly while on the stand. Her head bobbing looks to me more like from fidgeting, rather than the “rocking” associated with autism. And if she has any trouble understanding West, well who wouldn’t if they kept being asked the same questions over and over again.

      What’s my point? I see where you’re going, but I’d rather wait and see Rachael in a more relaxing situation, maybe in an interview at her own house later on with a person that she trusts and connects with to see how she is then.

  71. Gracie
    June 30, 2013 at 6:35 PM
    • wassointeresting
      June 30, 2013 at 7:14 PM

      So it looks like GZ called NEN back? The time there says 19:18 (or 7:18) which would fit the timing of the “bloody cell phone pic”. In other records, it was suggested that the call was placed at 7:20. The call time was only 1 minute and we don’t know if he ever got a chance to talk to anyone at NEN do we?

    • wassointeresting
      June 30, 2013 at 7:45 PM

      Here we go with the conspiracy theory. So in looking at these records, GZ got a call from another cell phone (indicated bye the letter “F”, the only Mobile to mobile call he got in those records) at 6:48pm from a number 407-731-0055. In a google search that number comes up associated with GZ so I’m wondering if that was SZ’s phone number. Does anyone know?

  72. June 30, 2013 at 8:38 PM

    LOL

    I thought we were done here, now the trial has started. But no, here come the phone records.

    SHELLIE top of page 8
    2/26/2012 TWO calls looks like TO the same number, one at
    19.08 ( 5 mins) and one at
    19.18 ( 1 min)

    Bit of internet activity around it and twp incoming SMS. The internet could be something like email notifications?

    ONE incoming, 30 minutes before, so too early to be a tipoff.
    407 731 055, same again right at the bottom of the page (next day) listed as being in Orlando and Winterpark.

    This is listed as defendant’s phone but registered to Shellie. So these were GZ’s calls.

    They are NOT calls to police, as they are to mobile numbers. So the NEN call was from another phone?????

    Really no idea. The first lot, the striped ones, are Trayvon’s. Heaps of calls and SMS, and each incoming followed by an outgoing within the minute. Oh, I think this is from towers????, Very odd. Incomings mostly the same two, , outgoings mostly to same number. Same pattern on Jan 1.

    I can’t read these bills, never had anything from these providers.

  73. June 30, 2013 at 8:50 PM

    NO I am wrong. The 4076885070 IS a Sanford police number.

    Well, the police had no tape for a call at 7.18, so it might not have gone through??? why call a NEN number after shooting someone? except to hope to talk to the same guy. “Hey it’s me again the @@@ p@nk nearly killed me and I had to shoot him?”. Stranger and stranger.

    On the 0055 cal all I”m getting (without paying for it) is Orlando Fl. Too early to be a tip-off.

    • wassointeresting
      June 30, 2013 at 9:00 PM

      @aussie, see my comment above, why would 6:48pm be too early for a tip-off? As I said, that call was the only call on the list from another cell phone (marked “F”) and it comes up associated with GZ on Google, so it’s either Shellie or a family member. The conversation lasted 3 minutes, so he would have gotten off the phone at 6.51 or so, give a couple of minutes to jump in the truck and drive out. Mind you, I’m one of those skeptical about a tip off, but if evidence shows to the contrary, I’d consider it. By the way, I think the “Orlando” just indicates where that phone was registered and not necessarily where that phone is at the moment it made the call.

      • June 30, 2013 at 9:25 PM

        At the bottom of that page, from late the next day, there are calls to and from that same number, and they’re marked as Orlando and Winterpark (which is further north of Orlando, closer to Lake Mary. On the incomings it does not say where the calling phone is.

        I’ll have to check up on this but I think 6.48 is too early for a would-be tipster to see Trayvon.

        NO. Actually no. Osterman was at the M&I bank at 6.38 and I figured that put him in a position to see Trayvon turn off Rinehart into Oregon Ave. That is, at the time I’d figured Trayvon to be about there at that time. From memory everyone worked out he could have got as far as the mailboxes by 6.45 or so.

        OK so 6.48 is not too early for a tipoff EXCEPT then Travon must have spent a lot of time in the mail shed before GZ finally found him. The clubouse lights do show him patrolling through the intersection a few times. This would make it 20 minutes from tipoff to NEN call.

        ALSO though, if he made a second call to NEN, Jon called Shellie on his own phone, not GZ’s, yet nobody’s given evidence about how he knew or got the number. Hmmmmm….

        • June 30, 2013 at 9:40 PM

          Manalo said on the stand that GZ told him the number to call and he used his iPhone to place the call.

        • wassointeresting
          June 30, 2013 at 10:17 PM

          @aussie, I’m confused, Let’s get this straight, there’s only one potential “tip-off’ number 407-731-0055 which was incoming at 6:48pm. Elsewhere in the records, when GZ called or texted that number, it shows as being in Orlando, FL. I do not see anywhere else that that number is associated with Winterpark. The very last line on page 8 was redacted.

        • June 30, 2013 at 11:38 PM

          OK you’re right, it’s me reading the lines cross eyed. The Winterpark number is the 4637 one and gets a fair bit of traffic, too. Mostly text. I get it on internet as being in Deborah Drive, no name.

          The numbersstar4ting with 216.155 are Tmobile internet addresses.

          They got no sleep. Texting mostly,and calling, all through the night. The redacted one is likely a voice call in response to one of the texts from one of the Winterpark numbers.

          Look at page 10, Winterpark everywhere. Must have some connection to there. Who lives there? Even on Feb 20… and what does THAT have to do with this case? Bernie has something really up his sleeve here.

        • wassointeresting
          July 1, 2013 at 12:02 AM

          “They got no sleep” Dang. NO ONE asked the physician’s assistant, if the circles under GZ’s eyes (which can’t even be seen on the re-enactment video) could be from a lack of sleep rather than a broken nose.

      • June 30, 2013 at 10:00 PM

        I’m not the slightest bit skeptical about a tip off. Especially one from Shellie. My question is, have they threatened her as an accessory after the fact and will she flip? Has she flipped already and GZ doesn’t know it?!? Many things… Many things.

        • wassointeresting
          June 30, 2013 at 10:08 PM

          @ willis, well I never subscribed to the “tip-off” if there was one coming from Taaffe , Osterman or any other neighborhood people. (By the way @aussie, I thought we had determined a long time ago that the guy at the bank was NOT Osterman.)

          I agree that if there ever was a tip-off the most likely one would have been Shellie. In fact, she had given him descriptions before when he called NEN/911 about suspicious people. That, coupled with his slip of the tongue in the re-enactment video where he says “my wife…” then caught himself before he says “I was going shopping” or something like that.

        • June 30, 2013 at 10:24 PM

          RIGHT – SHE was going shopping at 6:48 and saw trayvon enter the shortcut and head towards the clubhouse.

          absent a confession this wil remain a theory only for purposes of the trial however it seems.

          The Freudian slip looms large though. The prosecution should subpoena target receipts and vodeo to see if Sellie is grocery shopping,

          It also makes some sense of the “just tell her I shot someone” comment to Manalo. she knew who the someone was.

          All of this is of course speculation but informed by the testimony of W8 and the clubhouse videos – GZ had to have a tipoff!

        • wassointeresting
          June 30, 2013 at 11:03 PM

          @willis, oops I wrote the last message before I read yours. I don’t think she was going shopping at all. Somehow I don’t see her as a “pay cash for groceries” type. I think her credit card records, which the state has, would have shown if she’d been there. If so, they should have been smart enough to concoct a different story. Wait, what am I talking about? this is the same couple that used “Peter Pan” and reduced dollar amounts by a factor of 1000 as “code talk”. Osterman’s book did seem to make such a point of telling us how GZ liked to shop for his own lunches, as if to “explain” a man going grocery shopping at Target.

        • wassointeresting
          June 30, 2013 at 10:25 PM

          Oh and the succinct message that he wanted Manalo to deliver “Just tell her I shot someone”….as in “She’ll know what you’re talking about.” Oh imagination’s running wild again. We NEED to know who’s number that is!

      • July 1, 2013 at 4:44 AM

        @WSI says

        “We NEED to know who’s number that is!”

        If you are still referring to the number 407 731 055, and I haven’t missed anything in between while hurriedly trying to catch up, the number is GZ’s just as you noted up thread, in which case it must have been either Shellie using it or GZ calls himself !

        Here link to email exchange concerning GZ’s acceptance on to the “Citizen’s Law Enforcement Acadamy” in 2008. Check out the mobile number GZ gave for his contact details… same number.

        • wassointeresting
          July 1, 2013 at 5:58 AM

          Thanks gbrbsb! Going on the assumption now that it was Shellie who called him from the 0055 number. Note that in the few pages that we have of calls/messages from BEFORE the shooting, it was like 99% text messages, I can only see two calls made. On page 10, he calls the dog groomer at the number ending in 2700 at 3:40 pm. Now seeing how he usually texts with people in his life INCLUDING with Shellie presumably (he texted with the 0055 number a couple of times earlier that day), it must have been something unusual for her to actually place a voice call to him. Granted they could say she was giving him her shopping list, but you’d think it’d be easier for her to text him, unless she had to spend 3 minutes explaining what kind of tampons she wanted.

        • July 1, 2013 at 6:25 AM

          I suppose texts are cheaper so for short things those not of my era just text all the time. I haven’t had time to check the records, but yes, your’re right, a 3 min conversation with someone you probably saw not long ago must announce something new, something of substance, so a lot of possibilities. Unfortunately imo we are unlikely to ever know. If I understand it correctly even if Shellie has flipped, and I don’t tend towards that theory, iirc GZ can invoke Spousal Privilege himself so that anything Shellie told would not be admissible; and if she hasn’t flipped, they could just claim they were going through the shopping list or anything else.

    • July 1, 2013 at 5:04 AM

      Aussie, have posted link of the relative document below. The 407 731 055 number was GZ’s, he gave the number as one of his contact details when applying for a place at the Citizen’s Law Enforcement Acadamy, so if my own household is anything to go by it was shared by Shellie too.

      • July 1, 2013 at 5:06 AM

        Aussie, sorry the link I mention is in fact above as my reply to you has slotted in at the bottom of the whole thread.

  74. July 1, 2013 at 8:21 PM

    While the clubhouse vids suggest a tip-off, I don’t think they _necessitate_ a tip-off. GZ could have just been out patrolling. If he had been going to Target, he would have turned left toward the exit without seeing TM under the mailbox awning. But just driving around RATL and happening to spot TM as he drove through the RVC/TTL intersection is more or less consistent with the movements of his truck

    One thing BDLR missed in questioning RJ was a clear statement of how long TM was under the mail awning before he spotted GZ looking at him (or, to be precise, how much time passed between the time TM first told her he was taking shelter from the rain, and when he first told her he was being watched). This could also have been established had Bernie gotten a clear statement from RJ about exactly how many connections and disconnection she had with TM, and when they occurred. But he didn’t get that either. From her earlier statements to BDLR and Crump, it certainly sounds to me that TM was at the mailboxes no later than 6:54 (RJ calls back and gets a good connection), and possibly as early as 6:46 (RJ calls back and gets a connection that drops after 4 minutes).

    The point being that between RJ’s testimony, the phone records, and the CH videos, there’s no way GZ could have seen TM walking down RVC “in the rain, looking at the houses.” So someone may have told him that, or, perhaps being the PATHOLOGICAL LIAR he in fact is, he just made that up…

    • ada4750
      July 1, 2013 at 8:52 PM

      “One thing BDLR missed in questioning RJ” One of the things! Although, it is audacious to expect clear answers from Rachel.

      It is funny because i was thinking something similar. GZ first statements about Trayvon walking slowly and looking around came from somewhere. A tip would explain bus as you wrote there might be others explications.

      I don’t think he could have been driving around the complex. The Club House Cameras would have cached that, isn’t? Maybe he was on foot first (dog walk perhaps near his house) and saw Trayvon walking slow before the heavy rain. He came back got for his truck and gun. He knew that Trayvon was suppose to be near the Club House. He missed him the first time but not on his way back.

      The key point in that scenario would be that he came back to get his gun. Something he wouldn’t admit and therefore the lies concerning the beginning.

      • July 2, 2013 at 4:17 AM

        He would not be out walking the dog in the rain.

        Yes he would be driving around. It’s called patrolling. The clubhouse lights show a vehicle go east on RVC, slowly, through the TTL intersection, then turn around, go back through, u-turn again, then turn right to go to the mailboxes.

        He said he always carries the gun (except at work where it was not allowed) so he’d not have had to go home for it.

        The start of the NEN call (walking, looking around, looking suspicious etc) is a SCRIPT, a lot of his calls used to start with that.

        But he lied about the beginning, and tried to cut that part as short as possible, because he knows full well that if he stalked Trayvon, he is in the wrong, and self-defence won’t wash. He may have failed all his courses, but he did learn the bits that are useful to him.

        • ada4750
          July 2, 2013 at 8:03 AM

          Rain or not a dog needs to go out! I mean walk dog — see Trayvon — Back get to the truck and the gun — go look for Trayvon at the ClubHouse

          Maybe also GZ left for Target without gun saw Trayvon on his way. Made went back home to get his gun and so on …

        • ada4750
          July 2, 2013 at 8:30 AM

          To resume a scenario where GZ saw Trayvon. Lost him for a short period of time. Search for Trayvon near the ClubHouse.

          + One important reason to lie. For example, He lost Trayvon temporary because he went back home to get his gun.

    • ada4750
      July 1, 2013 at 9:43 PM

      whonoze wrote a long time ago that the reason why GZ lied about the Club House might be futile. In the sens that we will maybe never know. The important is that he lied. I guess that where we are.

  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