The Trayvon-Zimmerman Evidence

The Trayvon-Zimmerman Evidence


Everybody loves a good mystery. My family has been watching reruns of Law & Order. Detectives Olivia Benson and Elliott Stabler go wherever the evidence leads them. Hunches help them to find evidence, but without the evidence itself our Constitutional government doesn’t allow an arrest. The cops can’t just arrest people for no reason. There always has to be probable cause first. Evidence is everything.


After various twists and turns, a current “mystery” looks thusly: Trayvon Martin, a black 17-year-old in a hoodie, had been to a store to buy some Skittles and was on the way back to the house of his father’s girlfriend, where his father had sent him to serve out a 10-day suspension from his Miami high school for “being in an unauthorized area” the very day of his death (but a tweet from his brother suggests it was for assaulting a bus driver) – the latest in a string (1) of 3 suspensions within the last year officially involving potential drug use or dealing (as supported by tweets (2) from his customer) and graffiti (since the school made no police referral based on the jewelry and suspected burglary tool found in his backpack when he was caught for graffiti) – to “disconnect (3) and get his priorities straight”. Trayvon tweeted (4) late last year under the name “T33ZY_TAUGHT_M3”, including one that said, “Plzz shoot da #mf dat lied 2 u!”. The photo uploaded for him, taken when he was 15, showed him (with his unique arm tattoo) making a vulgar gesture. After one month on that account he switched to an account under the name “NO_LIMIT_NIGGA”, the first tweet being “NEW NAME, NEW BACKGROUND, NEW TWEETCON, I MAKE CHANGS B4 NEW YEARS!” His tweets in the last month are available here (5).


Hispanic 28-year-old George Zimmerman was on his way home from getting groceries when he saw Trayvon. Zimmerman had headed up a Neighborhood Watch in response to a string of burglaries in the area and (according to his father’s account (6) of what Zimmerman told him afterwards) thought it suspicious that a young person he didn’t know and appeared to be high was walking behind the townhouses but not on the street or sidewalk. He called (7) the the police and reported what he saw. Though selectively edited out (8) of the recording played on NBC, GZ said, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” Only after being specifically asked by the dispatcher whether the person was white, black, or Hispanic did Zimmerman say, “He looks black.” The dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the young man and said they didn’t need him to follow. Zimmerman continued walking to try (9) to find a street sign to give an exact location. At the end of that call Zimmerman said he was going to his vehicle to go home.


Within minutes (10) there was a call (11) to 911 from a neighbor who said there was a fight. Screams for help were heard in the background. According to the incident report (12), when police arrived they found Zimmerman with a bloody nose, a gash on the back of his head, and wet and grassy shirt – and he kept saying, “Nobody would help me”. His gun had a full magazine (13) and no bullet in the chamber – which suggests (14) there was a struggle for the gun, since the next bullet was stopped from entering the chamber. One shell was found. They attempted and failed to resuscitate Trayvon, who had a bullet wound to the chest. They made sure Zimmerman was fit to travel, handcuffed him, had the Sanford rescue squad give first aid for his injuries, and took him to the station for questioning, in addition to canvassing the area for witnesses and taking sworn statements from all witnesses they found.


Zimmerman claimed he shot in self-defense. According to the police, all the witnesses agreed (15) (although one witness, Mary Cutcher, later appeared on TV and radio claiming the opposite (16) of what was in her sworn statement, according to the police). Zimmerman’s injuries and the 911 recording corroborated that there was a fight. The person who called 911 said (18)that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman and that Zimmerman was the one who was screaming for help. Since there was no evidence to refute Zimmerman’s claim that he had shot in self-defense and no probable cause for an arrest, the police let Zimmerman go, though the lead investigator had wanted to arrest him.


Since that time, the police have had an opportunity to forensically analyze the scene of the crime for ballistics, listen to the recordings, and see the autopsy report for Trayvon. They presumably have access to Zimmerman’s medical records as well as the reports from their own EMT’s. Although ABC apparently deliberately covered (19) it up with a graphic on video in order to claim otherwise, video footage of Zimmerman when he arrived at the police department showed a gash (20) on the back of his head, still visible after being treated by the EMT’s – even on the blurred video but inrrefutably visible on enhanced (21) video, which ABC could have provided the public but didn’t. And his neighbor says (22) he saw him with swelling and bandages the next day. The police have repeatedly insisted (23) that Zimmerman’s claims are consistent with the evidence they have. Evidence available to the public, including reports, audio, and video recordings, is posted here (24).


A large funeral was held for Trayvon, and about 2 weeks after the shooting the Martin family appeared on CNN claiming that the shooting was a racist hate crime that police were covering up. It was implied that an innocent little kid in a hoodie, with nothing but Skittles in his hand, had been singled out for scrutiny by a racist white for simply walking down the street, and that if Zimmerman had just minded his own business Trayvon would still be alive. That is still the story being claimed by large portions of the public, including Barack Obama, Rick Santorum, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, former Black Panther Congressman Bobby Rush, and thousands of protesters demanding the arrest of Zimmerman. The New Black Panther Party has a $10,000 bounty for Zimmerman and claims to have a posse of 1,000 blacks looking for him. Zimmerman is hiding for his own safety. His family has received thousands of death threats and after Spike Lee tweeted a mistaken address for George Zimmerman the elderly couple at that address has had to live in a hotel because of death threats made to them.


If the police department is telling the truth about the evidence they have it is clear that Zimmerman shot in self-defense. The Martin family knows that, and at this point they are claiming that the police are fabricating evidence. The 911 recording, public statements (25) by the person who called 911, and video footage showing the gash on the back of Zimmerman’s head all corroborate what the police say they have as evidence. The Martin family’s attorney accepts the genuineness of the video footage – calling it (26) the “smoking gun” proof that Zimmerman had no gash, since there is no blood showing at that point. But the gash is visible in that video even though the blood had been cleaned up by EMT’s before that.


Those who are threatening violence to George Zimmerman and his family are wanting to take the law into their own hands. To this point, nobody in the Obama Administration has condemned the threats of violence or “vigilante justice”. Their silence is stunning. Former DOJ prosecutor, J Christian Adams, has said that a President injecting race into a criminal investigation is unprecedented, and the failure to rebuke the Black Panthers’ bounty on Zimmerman is chilling lawlessness.


The thousands of protesters who are calling for the arrest of George Zimmerman are either advocating that our police abandon the principle of probable cause – the need to have EVIDENCE of a crime before arresting someone – or else they are relying on claims of a vast police conspiracy including fabrication of police reports, witness statements, 911 recording, and police video that even the Martin family’s attorney accepts as genuine. The media finds nothing unseemly about large numbers of people claiming a police conspiracy that would require fabrication of official video and audio as well as affidavits and police/forensic reports.


An independent investigation by the state attorney has been authorized, to audit the police department’s handling of this case. The US Department of Justice will also be reviewing the evidence – not an encouraging thought after the obstruction of justice (including alteration of evidence and withholding critical evidence), perjury, and refusals to honor Congressional subpoenas shown by AG Eric Holder’s DOJ in the Fast & Furious investigation, and after political DOJ operatives dismissed an already-won case of what career prosecutors at the DOJ have called the most blatant instance of voter intimidation they’ve ever seen – by members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, PA. AG Holder has insisted that Blacks cannot be guilty of racial crimes and that he will not prosecute what he calls “my people”.


Barack Obama has said that this incident should spark some soul-searching. Yes, it should.


The next article in this series will address some serious questions raised by the apparent facts in this particular case. The final article will place this case into a larger context that raises even more serious questions.


End Notes:

  1. String


  1. bvw
    Posted April 10, 2012 at 2:08 am | Permalink | Reply

    Excellent write-up, of the kind real journalists used to produce, Bz. If the gun was partly jammed in a close quarter struggle, yes only one bullet would fire, and powder and lead dust residue and amounts thereof on the body and clothing would indicate what was where when the gun fired, assuming rain didn’t wash it away, and the forensic exam was careful.

    • Posted April 10, 2012 at 4:56 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think the Martin family lawyer knew he had to call the whole police investigation a fabricated cover-up because the forensic analysis would contain damning proof. We don’t know what was in the ballistics report, autopsy, etc but the investigators do, and they’ve said all along that the evidence is consistent with George Zimmerman’s story.

  2. fergal
    Posted April 12, 2012 at 3:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

    You have missed evidence that undermines Zimmerman’s claims that he returned to his vehicle immediately after speaking to the police dispatcher. On his call to the police you can hear him leave his vehicle and it is about 20 seconds later that he winds up the call after being advised he doesn’t need to follow Martin. We know from the time of Martin’s call to his girlfriend that the altercation between the two happened several minutes later. If it would only take 20 seconds to return to his vehicle, how is he in an area further away from his vehicle several minutes later? That can only be the case if in fact he continued to look for martin after ending his call to the Police. Yet he claims not too have done so. He is lying, and that undermines all of his story.

    • Posted April 12, 2012 at 3:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Do you have a link to something that says exactly when Zimmerman’s call began and ended, as well as a record of what calls were incoming or outgoing to Trayvon?

      The claim of self-defense is not just made by Zimmerman so his testimony is not all that has to be accounted for. There are 3 other forms of evidence that are outside Zimmerman’s control which also corroborate his claim of self-defense: the audio recording of the 911 call which has screaming right up to the time of the shot (which supports the story of a fight and not the story of a gun pulled on somebody randomly), the testimony of the person who made the 911 call (whose story has remained consistent throughout, compared with the stories of the witness who first testified that Trayvon was on top and then changed her tune after the race incitements of the media), and the documented injuries of George Zimmerman (which even the media has had to finally admit are shown on the surveillance video at the police station – video which the Martin family’s lawyer claimed was the “smoking gun” proof that Zimmerman lied and the police department fabricated its reports).

      We don’t know all the evidence, but it would take a lot of evidence to refute those 3 pieces of evidence that Zimmerman had no control over.

      Consider just the screaming on the 911 audio. In a post someone wanted to post here (which I won’t allow because the point being expressed was simply another an ad hominem attack ignoring the evidence I’ve cited in-depth and simply saying that I believe Zimmerman’s story because I’m racist; right now America needs to skip the race-baiting and concentrate on evidence – which you have done in your post so it is welcome here) it was claimed that Trayvon had to be the person who was screaming because the screaming ended when the shot was fired. Let’s just look at that.

      If Zimmerman had pulled a gun on Trayvon, why would Trayvon be screaming for an extended period of time? Screaming would only make Zimmerman shoot to shut him up, or else send Zimmerman running away for fear of getting caught. The screaming makes no sense with the claim that Zimmerman pulled a gun on Trayvon out of the blue.

      Does it make sense if Zimmerman was getting his head bashed in by Trayvon? Yeah, in that instance you would scream for help. Why would Zimmerman stop screaming when the shot fired? Because the head-banging stopped and there was no need to be afraid or call for help any more.

      We could do the same kind of analysis on Zimmerman’s injuries and the funeral director’s statements that Trayvon had no injuries other than the fatal bullet wound.

      If Zimmerman was having his head pounded by Trayvon who was on top of him and in control, Zimmerman would have head injuries and Trayvon would have no injuries. That scenario fits the evidence.

      If Zimmerman pulled a gun on Trayvon and shot him point-blank neither one would have injuries except the fatal bullet wound to Trayvon. So that scenario doesn’t fit the evidence.

      If Zimmerman attacked first and then shot Zimmerman when he was losing the fight, both would have injuries in addition to Trayvon’s fatal bullet wound. That doesn’t fit the evidence.

      The two PHYSICAL kinds of evidence (the audio of the screaming and the injuries or lack thereof on each of the parties) just so happen to line up with the claims of the witness who made the 911 call – that Trayvon was on top and Zimmerman was screaming.

      None of that relies on anything George Zimmerman claimed. Zimmerman could be totally non-credible and the evidence would still indicate that this was a shooting in self-defense.

      The only way it wouldn’t be is if Zimmerman had managed to get away from Trayvon and shot him anyway, but that is highly unlikely because the screams were continuous right up to the time that the shot was fired. It wouldn’t make sense for Zimmerman to keep screaming as he pulled himself up off the ground to get away from Trayvon. Ballistics would tell us more, and the police have had access to the ballistics report and said that the evidence they have is all consistent with Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.

    • Posted May 29, 2012 at 8:45 am | Permalink | Reply

      @Fergal, the girl was not Trayvon’s girlfriend. That construct was a Crump lie.

  3. fergal
    Posted April 12, 2012 at 4:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here is a good analysis of the timings:

    It is clear from this that Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin after he said he wouldn’t, otherwise he would be back at his vehicle two minutes later when Martin was killed.

    It is also entirely irrelevant who was on top in the fight – even if you believe a witness has said it was Martin (the witness denies this) it matters only how the altercations started. Martin had by Zimmerman’s own admission tried to get away from Zimmerman “these assholes always get away” – a reasonable person would assume with Zimmerman following and Martin trying to get away, that Zimmerman was the aggressor. You want to believe they both reversed their behaviour – the follower returned to his vehicle and the boy trying to get away instead became the follower and decided to attack. That’s is illogical. Of course Martin is entitled to defend himself, even if that means attaching someone pursuing him.

    What will determine this will be the forensics. My bet is that there will be no GSR on Martin, and Martin’s prints will not be on the gun. That is why the SP is confident in pursuing a 2nd Degree murder charge. There did not appear to be any blood spatter on Zimmerman’s clothes, suggesting he was not underneath Martin when he shot him, as his surrogates are claiming. If he wasn’t underneath Martin, why did he shoot him? As for the shouting – sounds to me like someone pleading for their life – Martin.

    Zimmerman has no evidence whatsoever to support his claims. His statements cannot be taken at face value.

    • bvw
      Posted April 12, 2012 at 6:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

      To fergal. You’re forcing a story-line to fit the outcome desired. Let the facts come out as they will.

    • Posted April 12, 2012 at 7:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks for the link.

      You’re mixing up the 2 people though. Zimmerman was on the phone with the dispatcher until about 30 seconds before Trayvon’s girlfriend said the phone went dead, and the phone went dead after Trayvon had confronted Zimmerman and Zimmerman had responded with another question so there was a very, very small time (like seconds) for Z to pursue Trayvon after he got off the phone.

      Trayvon, on the other hand, had 3 minutes from the time Zimmerman “lost” him to the time the phone went dead. He had 3 minutes to walk 1/3 of a football field to get safely home as we’re told he was trying to do. Instead he hung around and confronted Zimmerman, according to Trayvon’s girlfriend. The location where the confrontation happened is back behind a building that’s not on the way to Trayvon’s dad’s fiance’s place.

      That site gave a link to the transcript, which is at . As I read that the part I am struck by is that Zimmerman seemed afraid of Trayvon. Trayvon was staring at him and then coming toward him (“coming to check me out” as Z said) with his hand in his belt and something in his other hand. Sounds like Z was afraid that Trayvon had a gun. He asked how long it would take the police to get there. He talked about these “punks” always getting away before Trayvon started to run. Seems like he was concerned that the kid might have a gun and was checking him out and/or that the kid might get away. Then all of a sudden Trayvon started running. Z got out of his truck to follow him (that’s when he made the “f*ing cold” comment). There were 28 seconds between when the door of the truck closed and when the rustling of Z’s running stopped, shortly after the dispatcher said they didn’t need him to follow.

      Zimmerman went with investigators the following day to re-enact for them what happened. By then the police would have had access to the audio from the dispatcher and if there were details that didn’t make sense they would presumably have asked for clarification.

      How are you claiming that Z got a broken nose and a gash on the back of his head – he who attacked Zimmerman with a gun? The screaming lasted for 40 seconds, according to the link you provided. And you’re ignoring that the guy who called 911 said it was Zimemrman who was screaming.

      We don’t know what the autopsy and ballistics reports said, but the police did and the police’s counsel told them they didn’t have enough to convict Zimmerman. Police said the evidence supported Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. You do realize that for your theory to be correct the police had to ignore damning evidence and/or fabricate corroborating evidence, right?

      • Posted May 29, 2012 at 9:02 am | Permalink

        I am going to be picky here because I do not believe DeeDee even heard all that much, or for that matter I do not believe DeeDee.

        I think that with the interference from Crump and the manner in which de la Rionda led the witness, it is better to say “alleged”. Yes I am being very picky because I do not believe her version of events… they fit too closely with what has been learned about what took place but with the intent of being a contradiction about what really happened.

        Also, sufficient evidence is available about the boots being worn by George Zimmerman that night. They would have been very hard to run in them.

        Trayvon did not have the gun, but he used his fists to knock Zimmerman to the ground, and then MMA style he pounded George’s head into the ground. It was only after Martin spotted the gun that George started to really wrestle and to maintain control over the gun, then firing a shot.

        The Conservative Treehouse has excellent analysis of what took place, including analysis of the 7-11 videos. A lot of people have done a lot of hard work on this story, and there are some startling facts that have emerged.

        First, this was no ordinary purchase of “iced tea and skittles”. In fact Trayvon did not purchase Arizona Iced Tea. He purchased Arizona Watermelon juice. At the same time, the Skittles were grape or purple. This is significant, because these two items are part of the ingredients for what is known as Purple Drank or LEAN. A very smart Treeper worked it out after checking TM’s Facebook page, and there it was, that Trayvon had been purchasing the ingredients to make Lean… one of those ingredients is Robitussin DXM.

        Second, a very close analysis of the whole 7-11 video footage produced some other details regarding what was purchased, and what was denied. After TM left the store he did not commence his journey back to Brandy Green’s place immediately. Instead he was hanging around… and then 3 individuals entered the store, one of them purchased 3 blunts, and then took the purchase outside, after which one can see Trayvon leaving and starting his walk back to the complex. Blunts are used as a means of smoking weed.

        Now consider this, the point at which George spotted Trayvon as he was heading out to make a purchase from Target, Trayvon was according to the conversation with the police operator, acting like he was on drugs or something. It is highly likely that Trayvon had smoked some weed during that walk back to the complex.

        Considering that George was sitting in his car, it is unreasonable to assume that he was doing anything to have caused the aggression from Trayvon. That leaves open the possibility that Trayvon Martin was affected by the consumption of drugs in the past to the point that he had some paranoia about being watched.

      • Posted May 29, 2012 at 10:50 am | Permalink

        Yes, they’ve done fascinating research, and what’s coming out is very important to understand that Zimmerman was not profiling a race but a behavior pattern – and that there were reasons that Trayvon would have attacked Zimmerman. Here’s a link for the part about Trayvon getting a blunt from these other characters at the 7-11: I encourage everybody to do some more looking around at that site, because they do very good analysis.

      • Posted May 29, 2012 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

        thank you very much for providing your readers with a link to one of the best sites covering this issue.

        Jeralyn is another one who has been really good on the subject.

    • Posted May 29, 2012 at 8:47 am | Permalink | Reply

      the problem with the analysis is that the story from DeeDee is a construct. There is so far no way of proving her statement. On top of that the fingerprints of Crump are all over her statements.

  4. fergal
    Posted April 13, 2012 at 11:24 am | Permalink | Reply

    I am not mixing up the times. The dispatcher tells Z “we don’t need you to do that” 12 seconds after Z closes his car door. Z says “OK”. He should have been safely back in his car within 20 seconds at the most. He wasn’t – the attack was considerably further than a 20 second walk from his car, therefore he lied when he said he was returning to his car. He continued to pursue TM after the dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that” and he said “OK”. Z lied – there is no question about it, and that undercuts everything else he has said.

    I think Z got injured in an altercation that he either started or that TM started believing his life was in danger, because Z continued stalking him. TM was right – he is entitled to defend himself from the threat of an adult who gets out of his car to follow him. I also do not believe Z’s injuries were serious – witness the lack of blood on his clothing and lack of swelling several hours later, and no bandaging and no hospital treatment.

    The police decided not to charge Z before they even knew about the phone call with the girlfriend – TM’s father discovered that by going through his phone records. So no, I don’t think the police necessarily ignored damming evidence – they weren’t even aware that it existed. Their investigation was so half-hearted they probably didn’t realise there were major inconsistencies in Z’s story.

    As for police cover-ups – forgive me, but aren’t you the one that believes in massive conspiracy theories? The locals don’t seem at all surprised at the poor quality of the police investigation – they had a bad reputation that borders on dysfunctional. But as with your birthering, your confirmation bias is so staggering it prevents you seeing anything from another viewpoint.

    • Posted April 13, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      When did Z say he was going back to his truck? Quote it to me. The transcript is at . You said there was no question but that he had lied – a strong statement – so you need to document exactly what he said that was a lie.

      The dispatcher had twice told Z to let him know if Martin did anything else. Z was supposed to provide eyes. Staying where you are to watch for further activity is not the same thing as “following him”.

      Funny that if there were these glaring inconsistencies in Z’s story, the special prosecutor didn’t mention any of those things. Instead she cited as her new evidence the claims of Trayvon’s mother that the one screaming was her son. I guess it didn’t bother her that the claim of a biased source who wasn’t there to see who was screaming contradicted the sworn testimony of somebody who WAS there to see it. God knows that non-eyewitnesses are so much better able to tell what happened than eyewitnesses; isn’t that written somewhere in the rules for evidence?

      There could have been a cover-up. But see, the only way I know whether there was or wasn’t is by the evidence – which is the same epistemology I have used regarding Obama’s documentation problem. You didn’t get a close look at Z’s injuries. The cops did, and they said that what they saw supported Z’s claims. What makes you think you can call them negligent when you didn’t witness the injuries yourself? Oh, that’s right. The great chief rule of evidence: non-witnesses know more about what happened than witnesses.

      Same thing with the ballistics report. The cops have seen that. They’ve seen the autopsy. If there was something in there that was a smoking gun that the cops had covered up, Angela Corey wouldn’t have had to rely on the really credible claim of a mom saying her kid didn’t do it (even though she wasn’t there and contradicted the testimony of those who WERE there). (gag)

      How do you know what the locals think? Are you there? See, another thing we have proof of – and that is that the national media has lied about this case in blatant ways. Doctoring the audio so it made Z appear racist (by editing out the specific question he was answering when he said “He looks black”.) Covering up the gash on the back of Zimmerman’s head. Giving out the name of a 13-year-old witness – whose mother then suddenly changed his story (because, again, non-witnesses are so much more credible than witnesses) in a situation where there’s a $10,000 bounty for Z dead or alive and families have had to move out of their house because of death threats for anybody whose story didn’t fit the narrative for this sweet little peaceful Trayvon (who had already been caught with what the guard called a burglary tool and suspected stolen jewelry and marijuana, and there was a big suspension supposedly for Trayvon being in an unauthorized area but the tweets suggest that he had assaulted a bus driver) who was looking at the houses there in the rain and stared-down and came at the person who saw him doing it. Most likely decided to run instead when he got close enough to see that the guy watching him was on the phone reporting what he saw.

      The deal with the phone doesn’t make sense to me, and I have commented on that elsewhere. If he was talking on the phone when the confrontation started at the scene of the shooting his phone should have been confiscated, yet there’s nothing in the police report about it. We have the girlfriend claiming she was on the phone and we have ABC (IIRC) saying they verified the times of the call. Then again, ABC also told us there was no gash on Z’s head. They had to change their story when others could see that was wrong. In this case I don’t think they’ve offered any evidence of their verification so there’s no way for anybody to catch them if they lie. Z’s dad says he’s not even sure Trayvon was on the phone. I don’t know what the procedures are; if Trayvon hung up the phone and put it in his pocket would the police search in his clothes at the scene, or would the coroner have found it? Where is his phone now?

      So yes, I have questions. Maybe instead of altering the evidence and making this into a racial issue, the press could actually ask some of these questions…

    • Posted May 29, 2012 at 9:04 am | Permalink | Reply

      no your timing is wrong. George was close to the spot where he was attacked at the point where the dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that” and George said ok.

      Evidence that he was heading back to his car is that the car keys were found on the ground. That shows that George very likely had his car keys in his hand when he was attacked by Trayvon Martin.

      There is evidence that Trayvon Martin either backtracked or hid near that spot waiting for an opportunity to pounce on George Zimmerman.

  5. fergal
    Posted April 13, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Z has said he was going back to his truck when he was attacked in his statements to the police and through his surrogates. His father said so on his behalf as have his lawyers.

    The SP said they have much more evidence than they are currently releasing, so yes I think they have much, much more than you mention.

    Your scenario has Z underneath TM, screaming until the head bashing stops when he shoots TM. In that case, why is TM’s blood not all over Z’s shirt and jacket? If you shoot someone on top of you, you cannot possibly escape blood spatter. No doubt the forensics will establish exactly what happened – I very much doubt they will back Z’s story. Don’t you think it’s likely that the SP has uncovered significant evidence, to go from an expected manslaughter charge to 2nd degree?

    I know that the local police were held in poor regard by local minorities because they have said so, for example here:

    “The deal with the phone” as you put it has been verified by several sources, including the SP. I imagine the phone was taken by the police, but they simply didn’t bother checking either the phone or his records, they didn’t even bother identifying his body – he was tagged as a John Doe when his father found him at the morgue a day (maybe even 2 – there is some confusion over this) later. Doesn’t that tell you something about not only their competence but their disregard for the victim?

    TM was on the phone to his girlfriend when the altercation started – the records support that – which is suggestive of Z starting it, not TM. Most people finish a phone call before they attack someone, don’t they? Z’s problem is he gave his story without realising the phone records would catch him out. And he very nearly got away with it.

    • Posted April 13, 2012 at 3:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “Going back to his truck when he was attacked” is not the same thing as “Going back to his truck the moment that the dispatcher said he didn’t need to follow Trayvon”. You’re accusing the guy of lying and he never even said what you claimed he did.

      If the ballistics proved Zimmerman’s story false, why didn’t the SP mention that in the affidavit of probable cause?

      For all we know, Zimmerman might have had on a red jacket in addition to a red shirt and the jacket was taken as evidence. Or since blood is red maybe it just wasn’t visible on the red shirt in the blurry video from the PD surveillance. If there was a discrepancy that glaring and the PD ignored it, then the SP ignored it also when she gave reasons for probable cause. And I’d like to hear your explanation for that.

      Trayvon’s dad contacted the Sanford Police Dept the next morning and they came to his house to ask if the victim in their photo was his son. ABC put out a false report about how Trayvon’s parents were notified, claiming Trayvon sat in the morgue unidentified for 3 days. See Another instance of the media inflaming with lies rather than reporting the truth. (And notice that the headline for that linked article has the false claim even though the report comes right out at the end and says it was a false report. Why use a false report as the headline for the story?)

      IIRC the police were at that scene into the wee hours of the morning and even if Trayvon had identification on him it would have had his Miami info, which may or may not have been accurate depending on whether he and his mom had moved since he got his driver’s license (if he had one). We don’t know if the police tried or were able to contact his mother, who has a different last name. We don’t know what time of day the PD visited Trayvon’s dad. If the dad called the PD at 8am the next morning (after police were up into the wee hours taking down evidence from the scene) and the police were at his house at 8:05 would that somehow prove that the PD had “failed to even identify the victim”, etc? The reports always talk about it being the dad’s fiancee’s place (and she presumably had a different last name) so we don’t even know if Trayvon’s dad was listed in the phone book even if they were able to find a name under Martin (a common name) in the phone book and figure out which one was related to Trayvon.

      In short, we already know that ABC lied about these details, in an apparent attempt to smear the Sanford Police Department. By your own standards, that makes anything ABC says suspect. Without knowing what it would take to identify Trayvon and get contact info for his next-of-kin OR what time they actually visited Trayvon’s dad, it’s premature to claim that the SPD’s response was substandard.

      You can speculate about whether you’d hang up the phone before confronting somebody, but both Zimmerman and Trayvon’s girlfriend say that Trayvon started the verbal confrontation. Are you calling her a liar?

    • Posted April 13, 2012 at 3:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Okay, here we have it straight from the mouth of Trayvon’s dad, as reported in a PEOPLE article at,,20581404,00.htm

      >>>>>The next morning, when he woke up, Tracy realized that Trayvon had not returned home. “I started making calls, and I reached my nephew,” Martin says. “He said he hadn’t seen Trayvon. Then I really started getting worried. So I called the Sheriff’s department to file a missing persons report. I let them know it hadn’t been 24 hours, but it was unusual for Trayvon not to return home.”

      Three police cars soon pulled up and a detective asked Tracy for a recent picture of his son. “I had one on my phone, so I showed it to him,” Tracy says, his voice tightening. “He told me he was going to show me a photo and ask if it was my son. He pulled out a photo of Trayvon’s dead body. And the nightmare began.” >>>>

      So Tracy (Trayvon’s dad) started making calls as soon as he woke up, called the Sheriff’s office to file a missing persons report and “soon” the police were there trying to verify whether his son was the victim of the shooting the night before.

      This whole issue about how and when the body was identified is a media lie to try to make the Sanford Police Department look bad. Disinformation. Par for the course, sadly.

    • Posted April 13, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      One other thing. The girlfriend said the phone went dead. If Zimmerman had attacked Trayvon in the middle of Trayvon’s call the phone wouldn’t have gone dead. It would have picked up the sounds of the attack and remained on unless and until it was broken or something hit the button to disconnect it. If the phone went dead without sounds of a scuffle then Trayvon turned off the phone. He was abruptly done with the phone conversation and on to the next item of business.

      Did the girlfriend say that sounds of a scuffle were heard?

  6. fergal
    Posted April 13, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

    The police could easily identify TM through his phone – they didn’t bother.

    And I imagine the ballistics DID prove Z’s story false, which is why he has been charged. Do you imagine a tough Republican prosecutor is going to charge Z if she doesn’t think she can make the case?

    Since there has been no mention by anybody – LE, either family or witnesses of any blood on Z’s clothes I think it is likely they were not covered in TM’s blood. There is certainly non visible in the video. What clothes would he have changed into before arriving at the police station? There was no evidence bag of discarded clothes in the police vehicle. The police behaviour that night was disgracefully sloppy.

    As for your theory about the phone going dead – phones cut out all the time if they are dropped, or, as the phone was in his pocket, TM could have landed on it if he was pushed to the ground. Plenty of reasonable explanations.

    I don’t doubt that TM spoke first – why shouldn’t he? After all he had been followed by car and foot by a hefty male who didn’t take the trouble to tell him he was neighbourhood watch, and who was in a belligerant state of mind. Why the hell shouldn’t the person being followed ask what he was up to?

    I note that you imply the girlfriend is telling the truth about TM speaking first – good, because she also said TM’s first words were something along the lines of “why are you following me”? Doesn’t that imply that Z was, in fact , following him and not returning to his truck as he told the police?

    • Posted April 14, 2012 at 12:26 am | Permalink | Reply

      He was identified the next morning by his dad. They probably didn’t even have time to get to his phone before he was already identifed. Is there anything in the police report about them recovering the phone?

      The SP’s job was to convince a judge that there was probable cause for 2nd-degree murder. For her to not mention ballistics and blood-spatter proof that Zimmerman’s story was incorrect when it would have served her purpose so well strongly suggests that’s not what the ballistics and blood spatters showed. Which is what the police department confirmed when they said the evidence supported Zimmerman’s account.

      The girlfriend claimed that somebody pushed Trayvon because his headset hit the ground, and then the phone went dead. But she would have no way of knowing what dropped or why. If somebody had pushed Trayvon to the degree that it knocked off his headset he should have had injuries and she should have heard more than just the headset hitting the ground. And that wouldn’t have shut off the phone. It’s just as likely that he threw down his headset, turned off his phone, and punched Zimmerman, as Zimmerman claimed. And that would explain why Z had injuries, Trayvon didn’t, and the witnesses said that Trayvon was on top.

      When did Zimmerman follow anybody in a car? Source, please.

      I wish he would have told Trayvon he was in the neighborhood watch but I’m not sure it would have made a difference. Might even have made things worse because Trayvon would know Z had seen him casing the houses. Probably he didn’t tell him that because he was still hoping the cops would get there and find out what the kid was really up to.

      In reading from other sources it seems that there was a misunderstanding about when Z’s call was received by the dispatcher. The call connected 2 minutes sooner than my previous source had thought. So there were 2 extra minutes in there. And from what Trayvon’s dad said the cops told him, there must have been 2 confrontations. See .

      A lot of the claims are like playing the game “Telephone”. And we’ve documented at least 3 different instances where ABC reported blatant inaccuracies to libel Zimmerman and/or the Sanford Police Department (covered up Z’s gash, reported a racial slur that didn’t happen, and reported Trayvon’s body in the morgue for 3 days before being identified) and at least one instance where NBC deliberately altered the audio to implicate Zimmerman as racist. The girlfriend is only speaking to Trayvon’s lawyer – a lawyer who claimed the PD surveillance video was proof that Z had not acted in self-defense and that it proved that the police reports were fabrications AND who claimed Trayvon’s father claimed the audio wasn’t clear enough to show whether it was Trayvon screaming though the PD said he had said it was not Trayvon screaming. So we’re only hearing her claims through a filter we already know isn’t always accurate – and the lawyer’s comments are being reported by a media that has been demonstrated to lie as well as to just get things inaccurate. For instance, at it is said that Trayvon called his girlfriend but in the same article it shows the phone record showing that SHE CALLED HIM. If they’re not accurate on that point- even though the documentation of their inaccuracy is in their own story – then what else are they inaccurate on?

      So anyway, we have no way of knowing who is telling the truth, even in the media – let alone the witnesses themselves. Especially since what Mary C (for instance) is saying to the media now has been said to contradict what she swore to that night, which would be perjury. We also know that violence has been threatened – and actually publicly requested by the New Black Panther Party – and committed in response to this case. So when the media named a 13-year-old witness who supported Z’s claims, the witness’ mother stepped in to say that he couldn’t be blamed for his testimony because he was supposedly tricked into it.

      So we’ve got witnesses’ stories changing, threats being made, the parent of a named witness trying to keep him safe by denying his own testimony, Trayvon’s girlfriend only speaking to those who are biased towards Trayvon, and national media caught outright lying and altering evidence before presenting it to the public.

      None of that would be necessary if there was a ballistics report that proved it wasn’t self-defense.

      This whole case stinks.

      So getting to the bottom of everything and

    • Posted May 29, 2012 at 9:08 am | Permalink | Reply

      one little factoid blows your theory apart. The Sanford police stated that the phone was in fact dead. In other words they could not access the phone until the battery was recharged.

      Trayvon was identified the following day, not after 3 days as the LSM had originally claimed. The police requested the pin number but Tracy Martin refused to give them the pin… why!!

  7. fergal
    Posted April 14, 2012 at 10:25 am | Permalink | Reply

    You don’t think 12+ hours is long enough time to identify a homicide victim from the phone on his body? Are you serious? And if the police didn’t have his phone they are even more incompetent that I thought. He had his phone when the altercation started – what do you suggest happened to it? They decided to release Z without ever checking TM’s phone records – how bizarre is that? For all they knew Z could have stage dthe whole thing by phoneing TM _ you always check the phone records. Before this is all over I suspect there will be a thorough investigation of the police’s actions in this case, and I don’t think the results will be pretty.

    If TM was attacked and fell back on to grass, dislodging his phone – Z had grass stains on his back so it’s perfectly plausible it all took place on grass – why would TM have an obvious injury? In any case we don’t actually know what the ME found, so you have jumped to conclusions favouring Z again.

    Your confirmation bias is truly staggering, and explains how you have become so unhinged over the birther nonsense. You automatically believe anything Z’s side says. You accuse TM of casing houses absent any evidence he was doing so. We know Z followed TM in his car because he was in his car when he phoned the police and was describing where TM was going. I think the gf also said TM said so.

    I don’t know where you are getting two confrontations from – but at least you have finally realised your time line was way out. Z had plenty of time to get back to his truck if, as he claimed, he didn’t continue following TM after he finished his call with the dispatcher. He was in fact further from his vehicle when the confrontation started, so it is therefore axiomatic that he is lying about what he did. It really doesn’t matter who attacked who – the evidence is very strong that Z left his car and continued his pursuit of TM, without identifying himself as NW. And of course it would have made a difference if he had done so, TM had committed no crime and would not have been overly concerned at being checked out by the NW – I’m sure it happens to black youths all the time.

    • Posted April 14, 2012 at 2:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

      You have to read the links I give to understand why I say what I’m saying, because the documentation is there. If what Trayvon’s dad says the police told him is correct, Zimmerman did go back to his truck and was confronted by Trayvon there before Trayvon again ran off and Zimmerman got out of his truck to keep his eyes on where Trayvon was going.

      How do you know when the SPD identified Martin?

      Do you have a law enforcement background?

      Gotta run.

    • Posted May 29, 2012 at 9:09 am | Permalink | Reply

      it was not 12 hours plus before TM was identified. On top of that, the phone was dead.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: