Powered by TypePad

« Send Better Witnesses | Main | Spoiler Alert »

April 01, 2012

Comments

Ignatz

--I hope this explanation suffices to clear up any confusion.--

That is your area of expertise, girly girl.

Ignatz

the same voice identification used to identify Bin Ladin Recordings is being used in this case--

You mean those recordings where they'd tell us there was a 50/50 chance the voice was Bin Laden's?
That obviously shreds the eye witness watching Zimmerman calling to him for help.
Got denial?

Clarice

You know, kk, soulnds more and more like--SYBILVIA--every day That or we got a lot of addle pated women on JOM's speed dial.

4n0nym0u5

You are not anti-science; you just don't understand science.

Are you screaming that the latest enhancement of the police video could not be done? Of course not. It is in line with your existing belief. A person who understands science would recognize this as something called confirmation bias.

I'll say it again: it is pathetic and kind of creepy that you, as well as others, have turned this event into something partisan. It's us versus them ... again.

This is not helping our cause.

Melinda Romanoff

Clarice-

It's hit's fault.

Clarice

4n, who are you talking to?

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

Kathy. Pretend you are the prosecutor. Tell us how you are going to put on a case against George Zimmerman that will gain a conviction which will withstand appeal and habeas corpus litigation?

Betchacant.

PaulL

Superb work, someguy!

Clarice

Isn't it though?

Kathy Kattenburg

"That is your area of expertise, girly girl."
Yeah, I hang out in the comments sections of right-wing blogs too much. I've become something of an expert on clearing up righties' confusions about all sorts of things.

Re "girly girl": Is this your way of expressing the fondness you feel for me? If so, I'd like to return the sentiment.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Pretend you are the prosecutor. Tell us how you are going to put on a case against George Zimmerman that will gain a conviction which will withstand appeal and habeas corpus litigation?"
I don't even begin to understand why you think it would be so difficult to convict George Zimmerman, but if he were given a fair trial and acquitted, so be it. That's how it works in America. You kill an unarmed teenager after defying a 911 dispatcher's instructions not to follow or confront him, and you're arrested. Not all arrests end in convictions, but you can't have the second without the first.

Kathy Kattenburg

"That or we got a lot of addle pated women on JOM's speed dial."

Yes, and who would know better than you?

Kathy Kattenburg

"Because the information available wasn't sufficient to sustain an indictment."

There is no dispute that George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin. There is no doubt that TM was unarmed. There is no doubt that GZ lacked authorization to act in the capacity of a police officer -- to confront or detain or question anyone. There is no doubt that GZ disregarded the 911 dispatcher's clear instructions NOT to follow TM.

What is there about this information that strikes you as insufficient to sustain an indictment?

Clarice

"There is no doubt that GZ lacked authorization to act in the capacity of a police officer -- to confront or detain or question anyone."


He had every right to ask someone behaving suspiciously or unknown to neighborhood watch what he was doing on private property. There is no evidence he detained anyone.

"There is no doubt that GZ disregarded the 911 dispatcher's clear instructions NOT to follow TM."

There is no evidence that he disregarded the dispatcher's advice "you don't have to do that" which in any event as has been proven here about 20 X is not a lawful order he was compelled to follow.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Gosh, did you HEAR that 911 call to the girlfriend or just see a report by someone who said that's what she said."

I saw multiple reports in which the girlfriend herself described the phone call, and what TM told her was happening, and what she heard.

As for being unnamed, her parents asked for her identity to be protected. She is a minor, you know.

Kathy Kattenburg

And it was NOT a 911 call, by the way. It was a conversation between Trayvon Martin and his girlfriend on Trayvon Martin's cell phone.

Clarice

Really? What you heard is what someone said she said. We have never heard directly from her. She has refused to speak to the police and we have no text or recording of that conversation.We don't even have her name.

Strawman Cometh

the Sanford police, from everything I've read and listened to, *wanted* to arrest him.

The police always want to arrest somebody. Prosecutors have to look at the evidence and determine if there is a case before bringing the awesome power of the State onto the defendant.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Really? What you heard is what someone said she said. We have never heard directly from her."

No, Clarice. We heard it directly from her. Listen to me, Clarice. Read my words. The girlfriend was interviewed ON TAPE. On tape, Clarice. You can listen to the girlfriend answering questions in her own voice, Clarice.

You know, if you would google things before you claim such certainty, it might help you.

Kathy Kattenburg

"The police always want to arrest somebody."

Actually, that's not true. Police do not generally "want to arrest" people without probable cause -- it makes them look bad and opens them up to lawsuits.

That doesn't mean unlawful or unjust arrests never happen, but if "the police always want to arrest somebody" were something you really believed (I am certain you don't; you're just saying it in this case), then you would have to agree that all the times police have arrested demonstrators at Occupy Wall Street protests or anti-war protests or whatever were suspect. And I'm pretty sure you would defend every one of those.

Clarice

Assuming there is such a thing--and you offered no cite--it would be inadmissible hearsay of what happened.

Rick Ballard

"What is there about this information that strikes you as insufficient to sustain an indictment?"

The lack of a specific charge, dimwit. Jim Rhoads provided the applicable sections of the Florida Criminal code and he's also prosecuted a case or two.

It's not our fault you're two damned dumb to use any fastener other than double sided Velcro.

Kathy Kattenburg

"Assuming there is such a thing--and you offered no cite--it would be inadmissible hearsay of what happened."

Assuming there is such a thing? You're a pip, Clarice. It's all over the Internet coverage of this shooting. All you have to do is Google. "Okay, I was wrong" isn't something you want to say to me, though. I'm not saying you can't admit when you're wrong; you just don't want to admit it to me.

As for admissibility, I'm not a lawyer (I doubt you are, either), but I don't see why it would not be admissible. It's not hearsay. It's the woman who was the last person to speak to Trayvon describing in her own words the content of the conversation. Furthermore, the police could (and would, if an arrest were ever made) subpoena the cell phone record.

narciso

You want to revise and extend your remarks;

http://libertystreet.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/executive-assassination-squads/

Clarice

It's hearsay as to what occurred between Trayvon and Zimmerman;

I do not see anything online that is more than someone saying what she would say. She didn't offer up herself when Trayvon's death was known; her family said they didn't know about her until 2 weeks later when they looked at the phone records; after that she was reportedly hospitalized.

As far as I can tell if there were such a call it was not recorded so we would --at best-- have her saying what he told her. I do not see that coming into evidence And I do not see that we have in fact more here than Trayvon's dad saying what some unnamed person said to him.

Kathy Kattenburg

"You want to revise and extend your remarks;

http://libertystreet.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/executive-assassination-squads/"

Huh? Any chance you could clarify why you posted this link and what your sentence means?

Kathy Kattenburg

"I do not see anything online that is more than someone saying what she would say."

Then you haven't looked very hard, Clarice.

Here. ABC News obtained the phone logs. That story is here.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-phone/story?id=15959017#.T3o9qY7Boy5

The interview with Trayvon Martin's girlfriend, which is part of those phone logs, was played on MSNBC's show "Young Turks."

Here.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-phone/story?id=15959017#.T3o9qY7Boy5

These are only two links that I found in an extremely rapid Google search.

Here.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Trayvon+Martin+Final+Phone+call+with+girlfriend&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

I can't wait to hear your next absurd reason for why these aren't legitimate.

Rick Ballard

All the prosecutor has to do is ignore the eye witness and police report:

One witness, who has since talked to local television news reporters, told police he saw Zimmerman on the ground with Trayvon on top, pounding him — and was unequivocal that it was Zimmerman who was crying for help.

Zimmerman then shot Trayvon once in the chest at very close range, according to authorities.

When police arrived less than two minutes later, Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

Paramedics gave him first aid but he said he did not need to go to the hospital. He got medical care the next day.

Maybe he could go for first degree mopery?

narciso

You were willing to believe that the same Spec Ops forces that took down Bin Laden two years later, were some kind of death squad, goes to your judgement,

Clarice

The calls-and thanks for providing links, were not recorded so we only have her word for what was on them, and according to her word, there's not much. He said someone was following him and asking him what he was doing there, he refused to run she said and then his head set seems to have fallen out. She said [and it is pure speculation on her part] that that was because he was "pushed". It could have easily fallen out when he punched Zimmerman and wrestled with him on the ground, something at least one eyewitness and physical evidence (head and nose injuries) confirm.

Rick Ballard

Clarice,

The bit I quoted was from the Orlando-Sentinel. It's the first time I've seen "very close range, according to the authorities" which is further corroboration of Zimmerman's account.

Clarice

Me, too, Rick. First time I saw that in print though I always assumed that to be the case. from the eyewitness accounts.

Kathy Kattenburg

"It could have easily fallen out when he punched Zimmerman and wrestled with him on the ground, something at least one eyewitness and physical evidence (head and nose injuries) confirm."

That should be "if" he "punched Zimmerman and wrestled him to the ground," not "when," since we don't know that's what happened. It was Zimmerman's brother, and his father, who said that Zimmerman punched him, and they were not there. I don't think the anonymous eyewitness said that he saw TM punch GZ and knock him to the ground -- only that he saw them wrestling on the ground.

Also, let's remember that Trayvon also had a right to defend himself if he felt that he was in danger of serious bodily harm.

These are the kinds of things that can only be determined for certain in a courtroom, and that will not happen until and unless GZ is arrested and charged with the shooting.

Clarice

Yeah, they were just wrestling on the ground and Zimmerman gave himself a broken nose, busted lip and cracked head.
No arrest can be made without probable cause and the prosecutor who reviewed all the evidence including stuff I'm sure we haven't seen--said there isn't enough for an arrest.

A Florida poster here says in Florida there normally isn't even a grand jury empaneled--the prosecutor has broad discretion as to whether or not to charge and he said there wasn't probable cause--unless the state is seeking the death penalty.

Melinda Romanoff

Yep, KK, good thing that police experience counts for nothing. I'm so pleased you wrote that manual for the Chicago Police Department. It's saved so many lives in the last two weeks.

Strawman Cometh

"The police always want to arrest somebody."

Actually, that's not true.

Yes, it is.

Police do not generally "want to arrest" people

Yes, they do. It is what they do.

without probable cause -- it makes them look bad.

It does, except in the proglodistrics.

and opens them up to lawsuits.

It does, but taxpayers have to pay, so wtf.

That doesn't mean unlawful or unjust arrests never happen,

Indeed. you and yours are promoting one here.

but if "the police always want to arrest somebody" were something you really believed (I am certain you don't;

But I do. Especially here, where outsize powers are bringing the power of the State onto a neighborhoodwatchman. Trying to protect his community from a raft of burglars. Open your fucking eyes, you stupid gint.

Patriot4Freedom

Kathy K said . . .

"I've become something of an expert on clearing up righties' confusions about all sorts of things."

Really, then how does one explain these little gems . . .

"But the prosecutor drove in to Sanford from 50 miles away when he heard of the arrest, and nixed it. He told the police to release Zimmerman, and that's what they did." April 02, 2012 at 03:12 PM

No, that's another lie promulgated by those low-rent attorneys representing the Martin family. The State's Attorney, Norm Wolfinger, released a statement denying that story.
See the CNN article here for details:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/02/justice/florida-teen-shooting/

"It's fairly obvious, from listening to [GZ's] 911 call, [and] the call TM made to his girlfriend that [GZ] WAS following TM, and that TM had not done anything to reasonably arouse suspicion."

GZ said Trayvon "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... looking at all the houses" - - doesn't sound like he was walking straight home now, does it?
And yes, MOST people do find that activity suspicious.

"It's entirely possible that there was some sort of scuffle before TM was shot, but keep in mind that TM had the same right to self-defense that anyone else has."

Yes, but ONLY if he is attacked or in reasonable fear of imminent harm or great bodily injury - - TM had no other injuries, and he had no right of self-defense that would have allowed him to assault GZ.

"You kill an unarmed teenager after defying a 911 dispatcher's instructions not to follow or confront him, and you're arrested." April 02, 2012 at 05:26 PM

Since when is "We don't need you to do that" a commmand or instruction?

"GZ lacked authorization to ... confront or detain or question anyone."

Since when does anyone need authorization to confront or question someone?

"I don't think the anonymous eyewitness said that he saw TM punch GZ and knock him to the ground -- only that he saw them wrestling on the ground."

No, the interview clearly establishes that "John" saw TM sitting atop GZ, and TM was beating GZ, who was calling for help.

"Gosh, I did not realize that I was obligated to continue answering comments until given permission to leave."

You're not obligated to continue answering comments, and you most certainly don't need permission to leave.

But, it would help if you would just be honest in the items you are posting.

And it wouldn't hurt if you pondered this... Hearsay is defined as "Evidence that is offered by a witness of which they do not have direct knowledge but, rather, their testimony is based on what others have said to them."

Patriot4Freedom

As for the so-called "expert witness" audio technicians . . .

Check out this update from CNN, of all sources:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/02/justice/florida-teen-shooting/

"'There's a huge chance that this is not Zimmerman's voice,' said Primeau...
Owen also said he does not believe the screams came from Zimmerman...
The experts, both of whom said they have testified in cases involving audio analysis, stressed they CANNOT say who was screaming."
(bolded words are my edits)

JJohn

If you listen to one of the 911 tapes with the yells, one of the later yells if far closer than the others so it is highly likely that it could be a third person, in panic. Also, since both the Zimmermans and Martins hear voices of their relatives, it is likely that both were yelling at various times — which means Owen's technique of isolating all yells and then comparing to Zimmerman's 911 call is completely worthless.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame