O'Mara Publishes George Zimmerman Medical Records, Exhibits

Update: Judge Lester said today he'll rule on bond Thursday. He has started drafting the order.

As he waits for a ruling on bond, which may come today, Mark O'Mara, attorney for George Zimmerman, has posted the exhibits from Friday's hearing on bond at his case website.

At the June 29 Bond Hearing, the defense submitted a number of exhibits into evidence in an effort to demonstrate the weaknesses of the State’s case against George Zimmerman and illustrate the strength of Mr. Zimmerman’s claim of self defense. As evidence submitted by the defense is to be made public record, we feel it is appropriate to provide it here.

The medical records are here.

TalkLeft readers and commenters: Keep reading below, we have an announcement: [More..]

TalkLeft Announcement:

Since our threads close at 200 comments, and this case has generated more interest than each thread can accommodate, I'm re-creating the TalkLeft Forums -- which were set up for the Duke LaCrosse Case and taken down in 2010. They have been created especially for this case and no other cases are on them as of now.

They are ready to go, and although some design and organizational tasks remain, you can register now (free -- and you can use your same user name/password as here if you want, but you do have to re-register there -- and you will see a verification for your first 3 posts to avoid non-human spammers) and begin posting whenever you want.

Rules will be somewhat relaxed from those at this site, but until I get them posted, please abide by the rules here. And you can post urls there without worrying about html formatting.

From this point on, I'll mostly write about Zimmerman here on TalkLeft when there is news -- otherwise I'll be using the forums and I hope you will too. The "library" of links to documents, transcripts, evidence, etc. needs to be built up, so feel free to contribute to it.

If you don't remember the Duke Forums (which had 75,000 comments as of 2009), they have now been restored through mid 2009 and are here. Since the Duke forum software is obsolete and could not be replicated, TalkLeft's webmaster Colin and I have spent the last five days building these new forums. They look similar, but are not the same.

Feel free to comment here until we reach 200, but at least register for the forums now, so you'll be all set when this thread is full. Once again, here is the link for the forums is here.

I may be copying some of my posts from TalkLeft onto the forums, and you can do the same with any comments. (But, no comments of article length -- and no using TalkLeft to promote your work published elsewhere or as a substitute for your having your own blog. I'm thinking of one commenter here in particular. )

Again, there will be threads here when case news warrants it, but the daily, intricate discussion of all facets of the case will take place on the forums.

< Simple Answers To Simple Questions | Wednesday Open Thread and TalkLeft's New Forums >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    This is Wonderful! (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by DebFrmHell on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 01:20:55 PM EST
    Thank you so much, Jeralyn.  I never fully appreciate the time an effort that goes into running this blog until you come up with something else that I consider to be a brilliant "add-on!"

    Great thanks, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#3)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 01:51:47 PM EST

    Brings back memories.

    Can you make us 5 years younger again also? :)


    Wandering Waistband (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 01:47:47 PM EST
    Thanks, Jeralyn.

    Your hard work and generosity are much appreciated.

    I didn't get interested in the Duke case until after it was over, so I missed out on that forum. I'm looking forward to this one.

    I've got a couple of Zimmerman comments prepared. The first is correcting an error on the last thread.

    In a comment on the previous Zimmerman thread, I said incorrectly that I had documented Zimmerman's inconsistency on his location at the time of the 'waistband' remark in #147. I meant #168.

    In #168 I overlooked that Zimmerman associated 'waistband' with Martin walking 'around my car' in the voice stress (CVAS) interview.

    Here are all three excerpts, in chronological order as the statements were made.

    2/27R, 3:46-4:03:  

    And then he came back, and he started walking up towards the grass, and then came down and circled my car. And I told the operator that. He was circling my car. I didn't hear if he said anything, but he had his hand in his waistband. And I, I, I think I told the operator that.

    Zimmerman did tell the dispatcher 'He's got his hand in his waistband' (1:03, 7:10:37). There is nothing on the police call recording about Martin circling or walking around Zimmerman's truck.

    2/27V, 27:31-49, 6:46:08-26

    And they're like, "We need to know what house you're in front of." And I said, "Listen, if you come to the clubhouse, go straight, and left, and you'll see me there." At this point the guy walked around my car. He had his hand in his waistband.

    The dispatcher didn't ask Zimmerman where his truck was parked until much later in the call, after Zimmerman was out of his truck, and after Zimmerman had said he wanted the responding officers to meet him at his truck (3:18, 7:12:52).

    2/29-3, 3:16-25:

    Police call:

    He's got his hand in his waistband.
    Singletion: OK. Pause it right there. Where's he, where are you, where are you at right now? Are you still at the clubhouse?

    Zimmerman: I think I'm still at the clubhouse, yes.

    Singleton: OK.

    @unitron, Where Was George? (none / 0) (#4)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 01:59:26 PM EST
    From the previous Zimmerman thread, Unitron's #172

    Does Zimmerman ever say exactly where he was when dispatcher Sean says "Sanford Police Department, this line is being recorded, this is Sean"?

    Taken together, his statements logically imply that he was at the clubhouse parking lot.

    As Zimmerman described his route, there was only one stop at the clubhouse lot (2/26-2, map on p. 20, 2/27R).

    Zimmerman said he waited for a connection in front of the clubhouse (2/26-2, 1:05-2:42).

    Zimmerman said he spoke with the dispatcher while he was parked at the clubhouse.

    2/27R, 2:33-51:

    Then the dispatcher said "Where did he go? What direction did he go in?" I said "I don't know," I lost, because he cut down here and made a right. . . . And they said "Can you get to somewhere where you can see him?"

    2/27V, 26:42-27:02, 6:45:19-39:

    As I was on the phone with the non-emergency line, he walked past my car. And I lost visual contact of him. The operator asked me if I could get to somewhere where I could see, or at least give them a direction of where he was headed.

    2/29-3, 2:40-3:03:

    Singleton: Now you're saying he's coming up to your car. Does that mean you've already, at this point in the tape, you're, you're already on Twin Tree [sic], the street you didn't know the name of at the time?

    Zimmerman: Oh, no. I was on, I called when I was at the clubhouse.

    Singleton: OK. But he's walking up to your car now, right? On the tape?

    Zimmerman: Yes, ma'am.

    Singleton: Because you're saying he's walking up?

    Zimmerman: Yes, ma'am.

    Singleton: You're talking about when you've already left the clubhouse, and now you're on the corner?

    Zimmerman: No, ma'am. [Crosstalk]

    Singleton: You're still at the clubhouse when he does this?

    Zimmerman: Mmm hmm.

    Singleton: OK.

    If all of this is true, Zimmerman was at the clubhouse when the police call began recording.

    The first two excerpts clearly aren't true. The conversation they report isn't on the call recording.

    I'm skeptical of the third, for reasons discussed here.

    I've never driven while talking on a cell phone. Is someone doing that going to back into a street with a possibility of traffic, without telling the other party they need a moment, or there being some sign that their attention is engaged?

    I think George was ON HOLD.... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Jello333 on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 09:00:06 PM EST
    .... while at the clubhouse. I don't think he got through right away, and the recording (that we're all now familiar with) didn't start until he was parked on Twin Trees. George just has a few things jumbled in his mind. He knows certain things happened, but exactly where he was and what time it was when they happened, is a bit twisted. Which is VERY understandable considering his physical injuries, the emotional stress, the fear, his ADD, etc.

    I think he's on hold as well (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 09:30:51 PM EST
    He tried to explain that to Singleton in his interview the night of the shooting and she didn't get it -- she also cut him off while he was trying to explain that at one point.

    I think you and I are... (none / 0) (#12)
    by unitron on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 11:10:38 PM EST
    ...members of the "bless Singleton's heart, but sometimes I just want to grab her and shake her" club. : - )

    To be fair, she wasn't dealing with all of this with the benefit of hindsight, as we are, and was no doubt under pressure to hurry up and out what happened (or perhaps "hurry up and find out what happened before this guy lawyers up"), but there are at least a couple of times I wish she'd let him ramble on for just a few more words.


    Yeah, but... (none / 0) (#14)
    by unitron on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 11:21:55 PM EST
    In order to figure out which way the recording of the call doesn't make any sense compared to Zimmerman's "after-action reports", we need to know not just where he was when he dialed but where he was when the audio to which we are privy begins, and we need to know if we can depend on that moment being 7:09:34 PM, or if the beginning of the audio wasn't until later.

    GZ marked the map where he was (none / 0) (#36)
    by willisnewton on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 05:13:03 PM EST
    He just crossed it out quicklyy.  This is my opinion and it makes all the contradictions understandable if you consider he's at the first bend in TTL watching TM by the mailboxes.   GZ insists he's 'at the clubhouse" In the final interview when he's played the NE call audio and when he says it he's not meaning te parking lot.  He means BY the clubhouse mailboxes - thats the "best address" he can give.  

    This explanation removes inconsistencies while others seem to introduce contradictions.  It has implications however.  

    All of this is my opinion - what's yours nomatter?  Where was George when he describes TM's approach?


    That's an easy place to identify (none / 0) (#38)
    by MJW on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 03:02:19 AM EST
    If Martin were standing by the mailboxes when Zimmerman was watching him at the beginning of the call to SPD, I would expect Zimmerman to describe Martin's location as standing by the mailboxes.  Zimmerman uses the mailboxes as a landmark in giving directions to the dispatcher, so he obviously assumes they are easy to locate.  Instead of saying Martin is at the mailboxes, he says he's "just walking around, looking about."

    I am curious about your theory of what occurred, and have a few questions that will help me understated it.

    Which direction was Zimmerman's truck facing at the beginning of the call (0:01)?

    Where was Martin when Zimmerman said "please get an officer over here" (1:29)?

    Where was Martin when he started running (2:08) and which direction did he run?

    Where was Zimmerman parked he got out of his truck (2:11), and which direction was it facing?

    Where was Zimmerman when he said "okay" in response to the dispatcher's comment about following (2:28)?

    Where was Zimmerman was at the end of the call (4:06)?


    Understand not understate (none / 0) (#39)
    by MJW on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 03:26:14 AM EST
    Autocorrect is a fickle friend.

    Also willisnewton, in case you wondered, even though I'm skeptical that Martin was by the mailboxes, my questions are a sincere attempt to understand what you think happened.


    Z is fatter than I expected (none / 0) (#5)
    by leftwig on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 02:00:30 PM EST
    Listed at 5'7.5", 204.  He doesn't look svelt, but I wouldn't have guessed he was that heavy at that height.  

    Which makes it even more curious (none / 0) (#15)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 11:45:12 PM EST
     how a 157lb "stick" of a teenager could so totally dominate, and immobilize this mass of poundage.

    "weight advantage" (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Philly on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 08:12:24 AM EST
    Strap a 40 pound tire on your waist, and see if that gives you any advantage in a fight.  For bonus points, get your nose broken by someone with longer reach and lie on the ground with them on top of you.

    Right, (4.00 / 7) (#26)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 08:34:00 AM EST
    because outweighing your opponent by over 40 lbs. Is exactly like strapping a 40 lb. tire on your waist.

    But, thanks for reminding me why I stopped posting on this thread.


    Right, because outweighing somone (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 12:11:38 PM EST
    while being half a head shorter automatically places you in a clearly dominant position.

    In a street fight instinctively I'd much rather fight a shorter, fatter guy than a taller, fitter guy.

    Getting punched the face hurts; a tall guy is in a much better position to connect a punch on a short guy's face than vice versa.


    Just be grateful they have a new place (3.25 / 4) (#27)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 08:47:13 AM EST
    to play, Shooter...I know I am!

    TM was 158 (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by leftwig on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 10:13:54 AM EST
    lying naked on an autopsy table after being dead 15 hours and after some blood loss.  IF you are going to use Z's weight at the Dr. office for comparison, TM was probably in the 165-170 range (fully clothed, no blood loss, etc).  

    Z had the weight advantage, Martin the height advantage and I'd say safe to assume he was in much better shape.  A much taller guy has the advantage standing up in a fight and landing the first strike adds to the advantage.  While a broken nose isn't debilitating, it would cause sight and orientation issues, so its quite reasonable the guy who landed that first strike certainly gained the advantage and probably held it.  The last witness to see them fighting and can identify who is on top states Martin still had the advantage, so the ~40 lb. weight advantage isn't going to be an issue at trial given the other variables/evidence.


    There was no blood loss (none / 0) (#31)
    by Marilyn on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 11:42:33 AM EST
    There was very little blood outside the gunhole, the injury was internal. The hollow point bullet was designed to act this way.
    There was no exit wound. No blood loss there either. If there had been blood loss, it should have been all over George because we know by his story that he was under Treyvon.
    Fighters separate themselves by weight, not by height. I trust their long considered judgement as to what the important body spec is in a fight. If we do consider the notion that Treyvon shrunk, the weight differential was still 34-39 pounds, using 165-170 as a speculative weight.

    Fatniss (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Philly on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 12:16:34 PM EST
    It's true that most modern combat sports use weight classes..  But there's also an expression "fighting weight"- when preparing for a competition you want to be fit and fast.

    This wasn't a sanctioned fight.  GZ asserts he was assaulted, and ended up on his back.  A raw mass advantage could have helped GZ bull TM around from a standing clinch, but given it was mostly due to obesity, those extra pounds would only make it harder for GZ to get up once mounted.  GZ was apparently trying to get back to his feet for over a minute, and unable to do so.  If the weight difference leads people to assume "GZ should have been able to escape" what conclusion is there to be drawn given that he could not actually do so?


    Yes, that is George's story (none / 0) (#37)
    by Marilyn on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 01:27:01 AM EST
    What conclusion should I draw given that he could not get up?
    I would personally conclude that he didn't try hard enough given his weight advantage. His hands were unblemished. He doesn't claim in the reenactment that he even tried to fight off the beating. Yet he was able to immediately get up after the shot was fired and hold Treyvon down. He was also able to then walk around and answer questions.
    My next conclusion is that it isn't a given that he couldn't get up. No one witnessed the final seconds, so there isn't any corroborating proof other than his own testimony.  
    And, finally, I would conclude that a 46 pound weight differential could indeed make a difference. It makes it very hard to believe that George couldn't get the situation under control, at least until the police got there.

    Let someone punch you in the nose as hard (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by leftwig on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 09:52:46 AM EST
    as they can, then see how you respond for the next minute or so.  You won't be able to see very well and will have trouble breathing.  Then, allow them to get on top of you and continue fighting.  Your most likely reaction will be to cover up your head and face until you regain your vision and are able to start fighting back.  I watch a decent amount of MMA fighting and even with these trained fighters, some will go into the "turtle shell" for some time until they regain their senses and start to try and get up.  I doubt GZ is any sort of trained fighter and was likely trying to defend his face and head and wasn't as focused on trying to get up as TM was in the dominant position. How or when he became aware that he could reach his gun is anyone's guess, but at some point he got it out and stopped the attack with a single shot.

    Again, there was not a 46 lb weight differential as you cannot compare the weight of a clothed man in a Dr. office to a dead body of 15 hours, lying naked on a table after blood loss.  There is still a significant weight differential, but its probably about 10 lbs less than you describe.  The height, reach and athleticism differential would be in the other guys favor.


    Get to his feet or maybe trying to get his gun... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Mary2012 on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 09:04:04 AM EST
    GZ was apparently trying to get back to his feet for over a minute, and unable to do so.

    Trying to get his gun instead, might be another possibility.


    Marilyn, my father boxed (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 12:24:38 PM EST
    and the weight categories assume both fighters are in excellent shape and know how to fight. I don't think the weight and height of GZ and TM matter; either of them could have taken the other in a fight, depending on various factors that have been discussed  before.

    Not true that the blood would be all over George (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by leftwig on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 08:24:10 AM EST
    Martin was wearing two sweatshirts which would have contained any blood for the second or two that he remained over George.  I understand the EMTs said bleeding was minimal or some such verbage, but I don't know whether that was what they observed from the wound as they treated him or was the amount of blood loss in total.  

    I don't think we know exactly how much blood loss Martin had.  We do know he had a chest wound and was given CPR, so I'd expect most of the blood left in his body would be found in his chest cavities given his injuries.  The ME pulled I beleive 2.3 liters of blood from his chest which is less than half the amount that the body would normally contain.  Again, I don't think this means he lost half the blood in his body, but even if he lost 1 liter of blood, that would be about 2.5 pounds.  

    I don't know that 2-5 pounds is all that important to the case, but just stating that you can't say Martin weighted 158 the night of the shooting.  Thats his weight after being dead 15 hours, after some blood loss and lying naked on a table.  His real weight, as compared to Z's 205, is more like 165-170.

    I agree "fighters" separate themselves by weight, but you are talking about individuals who are trained and of equal skill/athleticism where the trained, bigger guy will almost always be stronger.  Were either of these guys trained fighters?  If not, then the classification is irrelevant and the fight advantage will go to whoever lands the first strike.


    Breaking His Nose With A Lucky Punch? (none / 0) (#17)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 11:49:45 PM EST
    So he gained a pound post-mortem? (none / 0) (#19)
    by unitron on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 12:17:42 AM EST
    'cause the autopsy said 158.

    I've seen people argue that he shrank in height before he got to the slab (mostly people who wanted him to be taller and therefore more intimidating and dangerous), and they usually add pre-mortem weight as well, but this is my first encounter with "he was smaller before he died".


    There's (none / 0) (#35)
    by spectator on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 04:17:26 PM EST
    still some confusion as to height and weight of TM
    and GZ's weight that night.

    i wouldn't rely on any of it...as of yet.


    One Possible Explanation (none / 0) (#23)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 07:28:51 AM EST
    is that the whole fight was about possession of Zimmerman's already drawn gun. A person holding tightly onto such an object has limited ability to strike blows with his fists.

    Everything has a tradeoff (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by cboldt on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 07:38:26 AM EST
    While unable to strike blows with a fist, a person holding a pistol gains the ability to administer a pistol-whipping.

    There is a SYG case in FL on just that sort of incident.  One person was trying to administer a beating with his pistol, and it went off, killing his assailant.

    Hair v. State, 17 So. 3d 804 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)


    Return to work (none / 0) (#6)
    by MarvinM on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 02:40:13 PM EST
    Apparently GZ was seen at 11:02am 2/27/12.

    It is recorded that the patient was 'here for a return note for work".

    But it also says that sometime after the fight "he then returned to work and was told he needed a police report and medical clearance to return to work".

    Surely he did not try to 'return to work' Sunday night, yes?

    So, Monday morning he 'went to work' and by 10am or so was trying to find a clinic to go to?

    Anyone with any enlightenment on this job?  Also, it isn't clear to me from this report, but I'm guessing the doc/office gave him that clearance.  

    What do you all make of it?

    I don't think it was (none / 0) (#7)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 02:47:38 PM EST
    his 'family doctor' as has been reported. I think it was just the doctor on duty at the 'family clinic' that was available that day.

    GZ already explained his inability to pay for medical care so it is no surprise he declined to see an expensive ENT specialist.

    Nothing there that has not already been reported.


    Do you think (none / 0) (#20)
    by MarvinM on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 01:46:21 AM EST
    GZ refused treatment because he felt he could not (or did not want to) pay, or do you think he refused treatment because he felt he did need additional treatment?

    Links For Zimmerman's Police Calls (none / 0) (#8)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 03:59:03 PM EST
    The Sandford Police have released at least six of Zimmerman's earlier calls, all of them non-emergency. Four were reports of suspicious persons.

    I'm linking the suspicious person calls in chronological order, followed by the other two (open garage door and children in street), with page numbers for the call log.

    Suspicious Persons:

    8/3/11, p. 39. Young male, matching description of burglary suspect seen by Shellie Zimmerman.

    8/6/11, p. 40. Two young males, matching descriptions of burglary suspects seen by Shellie Zimmerman.

    10/1/11, p. 42. Two men loitering in a Chevy.

    2/2/12,  p. 45. Man who kept going to 1460 RVC, where Zimmerman would spot Martin about three and a half weeks later.


    9/23/11, p. 41. Open garage door.

    1/29/12, p. 44. Children in street.

    The February 2 incident is mentioned a few times in Zimmerman's statements (2/26, 10:25-42; 2/29-1, 4:36-7:40; 2/29-1, 29:42-30:01).

    Zimmerman said he gave the wrong address, and called again to correct it (2/29-1, 5:43-59, 6:33-6:48). This is reflected in the call log. The report heading has '1960'. The correction is in the body of the report.

    The second call is not among those linked above. I don't know if it has been released.

    The call log for the February 2 incident lists Timothy Smith and Jonathan Mead as the responding officers. Smith took Zimmerman into custody on February 26. Mead was on the scene, recognized Zimmerman as 'the head of the neighborhood watch,' and mentioned it in his report. (p. 1)

    they have been up since March (none / 0) (#9)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 07:35:18 PM EST
    at the Seminole County Sheriff's office website, due to an FOIA request for them. If you'd like to access them directly from the Sheriff's office, I gave the log-in details here:

    The Seminole County Sheriff's Office website still has the audio of Zimmerman's earlier 911 calls on its website under the "media login" link on its media page. They were released pursuant to an FOIA request.

    Our agency released six calls that George Zimmerman made between August 3, 2011 to February 2, 2012. Any audio recordings of calls made prior to August 2011 are no longer available due to server retention space. The released calls were made on a non-emergency line and therefore did not require any redaction under Florida Public Records law.

    At the Sheriff's website, click on the "Media" tab and select "Media Login Page". The  username and password are contained in the FOIA request.


    Does he sound the same on all of them? (none / 0) (#13)
    by unitron on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 11:16:27 PM EST
    Has anyone listened to Zimmerman's voice on those other calls to see how they compare to his tone on the call that Sunday night, or his rather different tone in the post-shooting interviews and walkthrough?

    I have and he (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 02:17:56 AM EST
    has the same voice in all of them. He also explains why he is calling which is not indicated on the reports of his calls. There's a reason for each call, he describes why he's suspicious, meaning he's not out looking for people to report, but he's calling in response to something specific that just happened. and in most cases, because the person he sees matches a description of a suspect provided by either the police or witnesses to an incident.

    He's doing exactly what the police said he should do, phone it in to the non-emergency line. He doesn't confront the suspects, he asks that police send someone to check it out.


    You may misunderstand (none / 0) (#28)
    by unitron on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 08:47:48 AM EST
    I've never faulted Zimmerman for his previous calls.

    Of course I waited until I actually knew something about them before jumping to conclusions.

    But I hear a difference in what he sounded like on the phone that Sunday night, and what he sounded like later that night and in the days that followed.

    It's almost a different personality.


    It has been (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by DebFrmHell on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 09:44:39 AM EST
    a while since I had a listen, but the one thing I noticed on this NEN call was that he sounded decidedly nervous after a minute or so into the recording.  I think he got unnerved by TM passing by his truck and giving him the side-eye.  Calling it "circling" was just not so, IMO.

    After he reported that TM had run, he seemed more relaxed, almost chatty with the dispatcher.  I don't think he expected to find a fleet-footed young TM after he left the truck.

    One fact that cannot be ignored is that he was a chubby little man.  That he "chased" anyone for any length of time in that kind of out-of-shape condition is almost bordering on funny.  

    GZ and I are built very much the same although he is much younger so this is a definite IMO.


    He starts off the call... (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by unitron on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 01:46:33 PM EST
    ...kind of tentative, and whiny and sing-songy, and there's sighing and frustration...

    And then the next day on the walk-through, in some spots it's almost like he's the cop authoritatively narrating how things happened.


    Tone (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 05:37:27 AM EST

    The calls aren't long, about two minutes or so apiece.

    Zimmerman sounds the same to me in all of his audio.


    Thanks (none / 0) (#16)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Tue Jul 03, 2012 at 11:48:21 PM EST
    I knew they have been out for a long time, but I've had trouble finding the audios on the web. When I do find them they are at biased sites, which is why I linked them directly.

    Thanks again.


    Missing Call (none / 0) (#18)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Wed Jul 04, 2012 at 12:13:01 AM EST
    The February 2 call seems to be missing from the Sheriff's website.

    EXPY/ YMAN/ CBOLT: BREVITY ~ ~ ~ (none / 0) (#45)
    by WentAway on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 08:42:40 PM EST
    Will/ I appreciate your insight!  Pls chisel it down  ...  It seems there are only 5-6 posters on this BLOG that have been allowed to continue to comment wrt Martin possibly being the VICTIM.  You, expy, Yman AND most importantly Cbolt (b/c s/he is OPEN to both sides).  It's tiresome to read one-side of the case.  I lean towards justifiable homicide on this BLOG only because 95% of pro-Zimmerman posts are allowed to stand.  So, if anyone can point to other sites that are neutral, pls forward.  rodverb@yahoo.com - - - Posted in hopes that expy, Yman, Cbolt, Willis and  others are allowed to continue to POST HERE.      

    It ain't easy being brief (none / 0) (#47)
    by willisnewton on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 11:47:30 PM EST
    Short posts are attacked for lack o supporting material.  Longer posts are subject to rules about length.  

    I truly don't know if George is innocent or guilty and I presume him to be innocent until PROVEN guilty.  I also think trayvon should be accorded the same courtesy and not presumed to have INITIATED an attack on GZ until there is more proof than GZs say so.  But those aren't the  exact rules of the court-  he's free to assert that and provide corroborating evidence just as the jury is free to find him credible or not in these and other assertatons.

    Thus far I think he's got corroboration that a fight took place but not evidence that it started how he said it did.  Color me cynical, skeptical, from Missouri , whatever.  He has his    credibility alone to go on there, AFAICT.  IANAL but I've     written plenty of checks to them...

    I think GZ was battered by TM and that TM had the upper hand whe John saw him.  But I don't find GZ a credible person so it's likely we'll never trully know what happened.  What matters to me and what should matter on a legal blog is what can be shown in a court of law to a judge and jury.  

    Take the issue of the mailboxes. GZ never placed TM at the mailboxes, only "at the clubhouse.". If that means closer to the clubhouse than to another building, then my theory holds about TM only being able to walk so far in 34 seconds.  I just shouldn't say "mailboxes" because I'll get grief for it.  It takes effort to remain neutral.  

    I can't call GZ a liar on this site.  I have to say that at least one of his contradictory statements must be "inoperative.". It takes more words to do so.


    No crystal ball, no problem (none / 0) (#46)
    by MJW on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 11:15:59 PM EST
    I appreciate you taking the time to describe your ideas, and realize they must be speculative, given all the things we don't know.  I don't think I'll even be ready to speculate until I know when Zimmerman's call to SPD began, which will tell us how long he was on hold or whatever.

    I don't have any opinion on whether Martin was at some point near the mailboxes, or even whether he might have paused near them.  I just doubt he spent a number of minutes near them during the time Zimmerman was describing the events.

    I assume the investigators have talked with the neighbors along the east-west section of Twin Trees.  I know if someone parks in front of my house at night, I usually notice; though I'm not sure I'd remember any details by the next day.

    Various sources say average normal walking speed is 3 mph, which is 4.4 feet/sec.  However, I tested my own normal walking speed, and it agreed with your value of 5 feet/sec.  If I purposely walked slowly, I went about 3.47 feet/sec., and if I walked briskly, I went about 5.87 feet/sec.