Zimmerman's Wife on 911 Tape: 'I Am Really, Really Scared'

What a lame accusation..

 

Sorry, I don't see the consistency in his statements. Yes, they did play the tapes, but the defense severely limited the testimony of the 911 operator. And that was a major win for the defense.

If a person was afraid of his life and if that person did not know whether he was armed or unarmed, following him is never a wise move and is inconsistent with leaving the truck. Constancy would be being afraid and staying in his truck where he had more protection and more rights undfer Florida law. Leaving the truck and following him, with his statement that "these people get away with it." is more consistent with a confrontation than being afraid.

Besides there was no evidence whatsoever that TM was either casing the place or his intent to rob. His tatement that "these people get away with it" is highly suspicoius. GZ basically looked at TM's clothering and assumed the worst possible situation without even thinking. And that got him into the predicament that he was in.

If that was the case based on your facts, nothing at all.

If GZ was following me in that neighborhood, I would immediately call 911 and place the phone in my pants pocket or in my shirt pocket, and confront GZ verbally while making sure I was standing my ground.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, I don't see the consistency in his statements. Yes, they did play the tapes, but the defense severely limited the testimony of the 911 operator. And that was a major win for the defense.

If a person was afraid of his life and if that person did not know whether he was armed or unarmed, following him is never a wise move and is inconsistent with leaving the truck. Constancy would be being afraid and staying in his truck where he had more protection and more rights undfer Florida law. Leaving the truck and following him, with his statement that "these people get away with it." is more consistent with a confrontation than being afraid.

Besides there was no evidence whatsoever that TM was either casing the place or his intent to rob. His tatement that "these people get away with it" is highly suspicoius. GZ basically looked at TM's clothering and assumed the worst possible situation without even thinking. And that got him into the predicament that he was in.

If that was the case based on your facts, nothing at all.

If GZ was following me in that neighborhood, I would immediately call 911 and place the phone in my pants pocket or in my shirt pocket, and confront GZ verbally while making sure I was standing my ground.

 

With all due respect, I don't have to submit anything......

Come on - let's get real here - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what happened that night. Z had already called 911, but like a dummy, he got out of his truck to follow and keep close tabs on M....

Like a dummy, M decided to keep close tabs on Z by darting, ducking and diving in and out of the bushes, inching his way closer to Z until he was able to attack and pin him to the ground......and we all know what happened after that...... someone died.

I call that a very stupid and VERY dangerous 'cat and mouse' game and the idiots were playing this game on a dark, rainy night......

Z should have spoken up and identified himself as the NW and simply asked M if he lived there and no, he didn't have to given his name. Saying he was the neighborhood watchman would have been enuf and the kid would have said his dad lived there. Or M should have taken the initative and told him his dad was a resident there - but SAY SOMETHING! Don't just sneak around silently in the middle of the night ...... THAT'S STUPID!

You know, sometimes communication can be a great thing..... questions are answered, suspicions are gone and you can go on your way...

Respectfully...........

 

What bushes?

 

Deny, deny...... I don't care. The posts are here about you discussing what you found out about Z & his gf(s)..........

 

Lets don't use the word 'follow' anymore because it is being used as a tool inconsistent with reality. When you say it you are burdening the word with an accusation or malice on behalf of Zimmerman. So, lets do away with the offending and inaccurate vernacular and use something more honest. Lets say, "attempting to maintain a persistent observation of a guy that was 150' away and running FROM his location as to convey to the police where he went". How about that?

When you are at Wal-Mart and walking down the isle to get some corn, aren't you actually following the guy at the end of the isle? You ARE headed his way! And what if you caught a glimpse of a two headed man at Wal-Mart at the end of an isle and you walked to the end of the isle to take another look, aren't you following that man? Of course not. To say that you were 'following' him carries with it an accusation. Thus, lets dont say follow anymore, lets say "looked where Martin was going".
There is no proofs that Zimmerman intended to overcome, detain, capture or hunt down Martin. There are reams of evidence that he simply intended to tell PD where the guy was and that required watching martin.

As to Zimmerman being afraid. Zimmerman could certainly be afraid of a confrontation with Martin. But that doesn't translate to Zimmerman being afraid of getting out of his truck to see where Martin went when he started running and turned a corner 150' away. I'm afraid of Chuck Norris but not when he's running from me a block away.

You demand evidence where none is required. You burden Zimmerman with obligations that you have manufactured apart from the law and apart from what is typical of a concerned citizen. Although Zimmerman isnt limited by the police watch programs suggestions they do convey that you have the right to suspect persons according to your own judgements.

"Trust your instincts".

"Its better to be overly suspicious".

Zimmerman himself saw a burglar 'get away' that was breaking into a house. The person was later caught. But not because PD came immediately. There was persistent criminal element and a persistent problem with them getting away. Zimmerman's statements were reasonable AND accurate. Your position also assumes that it was an absolute fact that Martin wasn't looking for an easy opportunity to burglarize a home at the time. Martins history certainly suggests that its more than plausible that someone that was kicked out of their home, kicked out of school, smoked pot, possessed 19 pieces of women's jewelry that he couldn't account for, possessed a screw driver in his backpack along with the jewelry etc. would be looking for easy and quick money at night, alone, on foot, wearing a hood.

Respectfully,

 

Oh dang! That's right. You have the whole landscape and housing community right down to a science and not a bush around for miles.

Ok. No bushes for M to hide behind.... my apologies.

DOES IT MATTER? He still managed to very successfully keep himself hidden from Z in order to ambush him and get him pinned down on the ground....

I see that night w/2 idiots trying to silently outsmart each other on a dark, rainy night where the visibility wasn't to great, neither one had a clue who each other was, if the other had a weapon and neither not smart enuf to think of that possibility as they're both lurking around in the dark, keeping each other in their sight and neither smart enuf to speak up while M kept his hand on his cell phone, yakking to his idiot girlfriend, instead of 911 and Z kept his hand on his gun......

Now you can continue to count every tree and flower on the premises and the exact location of the building and how many doors & windows,etc if it makes you feel better.... but you can't ignore the fact that if one of them had stopped their sneaking around, had spoken up and said "Hey, dude! I'm the neighborhood watchman. What's your business here?" or "Why are you following me? My dad lives here"....... the results would very likely have ended up a lot happier w/just that little bit of info about each other to stop the sneaking around.........

 

Thank you for your reply,
My apologies for the adversarial tone of post as this was unintended. I just got lazy and careless with my phrasing.

Ordinarily I would agree but the very nature of this website assumes that debates occur and debating etiquette would somewhat be observed, which would include proofs and citations.

The game of cat and mouse lasted right at 14 seconds. Which was the time Zimmerman saw Martin who was 150' away begin running and turned a corner. Zimmerman took 14 seconds to reach that corner and that was it. Zimmerman then walked straight down his original path(90 degrees away from Martin, done a U turn and was confronted by Martin). Its hardly unreasonable for a watchman to run 150' to see where someone went. You can call it stupid, but that doesnt make it stupid.

Zimmerman speaking to Martin and having a conversation makes sense if they are standing next to one another in the daylight. But they weren't. Again, when and where was it that it would be relevant for Zimmerman to identify himself?

Respectfully,

 

Click thumbnail for larger version.

 

Absolutely! Hey, you got an address? Post it!

- - - Updated - - -

OJZ lied on FOX noise. So?

- - - Updated - - -

He's guilty of murder in many people's minds. He beat the rap, just like OJ. Still a murderer.

 

that's 111 Retreat View....no wait that's the clubhouse....

In some people's mind the Easter Bunny is real but then they turn 7 and realize it isn't true.

 

Doesn't make OJZ any less guilty of murderer. What comes around, goes around. He'll get his one day. Somebody will straighten him out...

 

That is why I accept the not guilty verdict. Same for the OJ case. I believe I have posted before that if George is the lunatic that the Trayvon apologists paint him as being then he will get what he has coming to him sooner or later. It is just that in this case the evidence doesn't support anything other than self defense. Sure, there are all sorts of other things that could have happened, heck even aliens could have been involved. The trouble is there is no evidence to support that theory either.

 

All right, you win. This isn't worth my time. I had already illustrated where the NW would see a stranger on premises, wonder about his purpose there and would ID himself as the NWman and ask him about his reason for being there.......

This can be done w/o having to 'stand side by side in broad daylight having a conversation'..... seriously. It can be.

If you can't envision a short exchange of info b/t a NW and another person, well what can I say?

And again..... b/c this wasn't attempted, guess what happened? Their stupidity got one of them killed...

 

Many say the same thing about Casey Anthony and her victim was only 2 yrs old and totally defenseless...

Where was your outrage about Caylee?

 

who in the hell is OJZ?
Zimmerman did not murder anyone. Again, you weren't there, you saw nothing, and you know less. and hoping for ill will against another is a sin

 

Whenever did hysteria feed of evidence?

 

You want outrage about little Caylee on a Zimmerman thread? Throwing stuff at the wall is weakness.

 

Well, the precedent has been established now anyway.,that being shoot first and ask questions later. We'll see how the next claim of "self defense" goes. It could be a good thing in that you could con somebody you don't like to go to Florida, and kill them, and get away with it. The verdict could help rid the world of some of the azzholes you have to deal with every day.

 

OJ Zimmerman. He got away with murder, plain and simple. Ill will? I just hope he gets his just deserves, whatever they may be. How's that a sin?

 

Read my question again. I had said 'where WAS your outrage....' not 'where IS your outrage'. Big diff there - I'll let you figure it out - and we all know very few posters posted their outrage about that toddler's disappearance and the outcome of the trial - including you.

The 1 yr old white baby boy in GA being shot in the face by a black 17 yr old animal was pretty much ignored by you and your kind. Why didn't you investigate that 17 yr old's background?

"Throwing stuff at the wall shows weakness" made me laugh. You have been accused repeatedly of trying to derail a thread by bringing up stuff totally unrelated to the topic. How quickly one forgets.......

 

You do have a point. The best way to not get capped? Don't attack someone even
if you think they provoked you. Violence is not ok whether it is with a gun or not. It is hypocritical to say Trayvon's actions were Ok but not George's.