Timeline

 

This is a very real and serious problem for the defence

It will be very interesting to see how both sides use/explain the following in their closings:

Update: In his closing arguments, Mark O'Mara felt he had to offer some explanation for why Zimmerman had lingered in that dark area for 2 minutes+ after the NEN ended. Zimmerman had always denied that he delayed at all - that he headed straight back for his truck. The walk from where he says he ended the call on Retreat Vieew Circle to where he says he was attacked would have taken him only 20 seconds.
O'Mara offered a theory that Zimmerman might have been "looking around" . Yes. Looking around in the dark, cold and rain.....for..... eh..... something or other.

The defence timeline is online at http://gzdocs.com/documents/opening_graphics/timeline.jpg
*The times are interesting because they are what the defence accepts as fact.*

Three key times:

7:13:40  GZ call ends  (NEN call)
7:15:43  W8 call to TM ends
7:16:11  Witness 11 911 call (first to call)     (Lauer)

The gap between W8 call ending and the 911 call connecting is 28 seconds.
That 28 seconds includes:
  1. Any delay between the call ending and the encounter beginning
  2. A delay until the noises become loud enough for Lauer and partner to hear them over their TV
  3. A delay while they mute their TV and listen
  4. A delay while they decide that the noises indicate that a 911 is appropriate
  5. A delay as she gets the phone and dials 911
  6. A delay until the 911 dispatcher picks up the call.
    This last delay was 11 seconds. The Event Report for Laeur’s 911 call indicates that it began ringing at 7:16:00 and was picked up at 7:16:11
    (This is explained at the bottom of this page)

The gap from W8’s call ending to Laeur completing the dialling was therefore just 17 seconds.

Does this 17 second gap not indicate that the end of W8’s call and the encounter would have to be near-simultaneous? This would support W8’s account.


If we disregard W8’s account of the content of that call, would not Martin have terminated the call well in advance of any deliberate attack on Zimmerman?
Would Martin have gone to attack and beat up this stranger with his phone in his hand?
He would have no idea of how capable this person was. He’s NOT going to go in to attack an unknown opponent with a phone in his hand.

17 seconds is simply not enough time for him to end the call - pocket the phone - approach Zimmerman - start the fight - get overheard by Laeur – Laeur muting TV – Laeur listening and deciding to dial 911 – Laeur dialling.


But whoa! It gets worse for the defence

Laeur's evidence was that there was a delay in dialling 911 - problems with phones. They think the delay in dialling was maybe up to 30 seconds.
This would mean that the call dropped up to 13 seconds after the fight was noticed.
Do we really beleve that Martin went in to attack an unkown opponent while still on a phone call?
Martin's phone was found in the grass 50 feet South of the T.
Does this not all confirm W8's account of how it started?


It gets even worse for the defence

The gap between the NEN ending and the 911 connecting is 2 minutes and 31 seconds.
The gap between the NEN ending and Lauer completing the dialling is 2 minutes and 20 seconds.
The gap between the NEN ending and W8’s call ending is 1 minute and 30 seconds.





In the Walk Through, Zimmerman states that he headed back to his truck immediately on ending the NEN. He says that he was standing on Retreat View Circle when the call ended.
In the Walk Through, he takes about 20 seconds to get from there to the point at which he says he was attacked.

What he would have to explain is how it took him 1 minute and 30 seconds to cover a walk that took him 20 seconds in the Walk Through.
What was he doing for 1 minute and 30 seconds between the NEN ending and the encounter beginning?

This walk from RVC might hot have happened in any case. We only have Zimmerman’s word that he actually went there. He could have been anywhere before he ended up outside John Good’s porch.


How can the defence explain this time immediately after the NEN?
MOM/West might advance a theory that Zimmerman hung around on RVC for over a minute before deciding to walk back to his truck.
The problem is that Zimmerman would have to go on the stand to confirm this theory – and to correct his recorded evidence that he had started back for his truck immediately.


MOM/West might suggest that he got fed up of waiting around for the cops. It was after all dark, cold and wet out there.
Apart from this being contradicted by Zimmerman's own  'evidence' the problems with that are
  1. He had already been out of his warm dry truck and in the dark, cold and rain for 1 minute 52 seconds (since 7:11:48) The “suspect”  has long gone. “He ran”
  2. He had agreed to meet the cops at the mailboxes (just beyond his truck) – but changed at the last moment to a plan that they would call him to ask him where he was at. He had suddenly decided to stay out in the dark, cold and rain for some reason.
  3. If his intention was to wait where he says he was - on RVC, why did he not give the house number to the dispatcher at that stage?
  4. If he did become frustrated by an additional 1 minute in the dark, cold and rain – and then decided to abandon the meeting at RVC, this should have been a memorable event. 
    It would be memorable because of the frustration. It would be memorable because he would have been aware that once he left RVC, he would not be able to give directions to where he was at. THis is why he says he went to RVC in the first place. 
Yet he insists that he started back for his truck immediately. No hanging about.

Any reasonable person would conclude that Zimmerman is lying about what happened.
We only have to view the recording of the Hannity Interview to see the lengths to which he will go to try and fool people into thinking that he did not hang around.

Hannity does the build-up:
HANNITY: And coming up, just what happened during that fateful missing minute just before the shooting. George Zimmerman, he will tell us coming up next.
-break-
HANNITY: What did you do from that moment forward? Because this is where we get into this minute gap in this case, you know, and what did you do from that minute forward when the dispatch said "we don't need you to follow him?" What did you do next?
HANNITY: How long was it, George, after that, that you saw Trayvon again? Because you said you stopped, that you did not continue pursuing him. When did you next see Trayvon Martin?

ZIMMERMAN: Less than 30 seconds.


There are two outrageous lies here
  1. The ‘gap’ that people might have heard about is only a minute – and it begins at “We don’t need you to do that”.
  2. Martin attacked Zimmerman less than 30 seconds later. Poor Zimmerman had no chance to get back to his truck after he stopped following. Right?

MOM sat po-faced beside Zimmerman while he delivered those breathtaking falsehoods.


Why is Zimmerman in such a state of denial about following?

Why is Zimmerman going to such extreme lengths to give a false  impression that he did not linger?

Any reasonable person would conclude that he went in search of Martin.




Speaking of "Reasonable Persons"...
Take a look at my notes on the Jury Instructions page.



The Lauer 911 Event Report

 The original is available on page 9 of the States 7th Supplementary Discovery - available at
http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/GZ-States-7th-Supp-Discovery_Redacted.pdf



Note the header:
ANI.ALI:     02/26/2012 19:16:00
Connection:  02/26/2012 19:16:11
Created:       02/26/2012 19:16:35  

The "ANI/ALI" is the time that the system detects the incoming 911.
The "Connection" is the time that the dispatcher picks up the call.
The "Created" is the time that the dispatcher enters the first comments into the system.


The ANI/ALI information is not filled in on NEN calls (for anonymity). It is filled in for 911 calls.
More info at http://www.911dispatch.com/911/911glossary.html





15 comments:

  1. Rachel said she heard part of the scuffle (remember the 'wet grass' I'll never forget it) Her call may not have disconnected right away.

    Also, she was probably high so who knows what she heard, she's been coached up by Crump and still could barely testify.

    The real question is, with Trayvon 'out of sight' for those two minutes, why didn't he just go home? He was certainly close enough and had a head start on Zimmerman, who was not following close(or running, as both he and Rachel says TM was)

    The answer is - Trayvon circled back to beat a cracka's ass.

    Otherwise it makes no sense that he was still near the T by that time, as he had already passed it and according to Zimmerman(I lost him) and Rachel (says TM told her he lost him) he was well out of range from Zimmerman.

    The only explanation is he circled back.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nope!
    The explanation is that he relaxed once he got off the street and away from the truck.
    He thought he had "lost the guy". He concentrated on his convo with the girl.
    Then the guy appears on foot. The obvious for him to do then is to stay very still in the dark.

    There is a big problem with the "double-back" theory.
    If Zimmerman walked across to RVC as he says he did, then he would only have been visible to anyone down the central pat for only 20 to 30 seconds as he crossed past the T and over out of sight to RVC.
    Martin would have no idea where he was. He can't double back.

    Much has been made of Rachel reporting "right by". Having come the distance from the 7-11, just being near the T and only 100 yards from the house is "right by".

    The killer ( no pun intended ) is the 17 seconds from the Rachel call ending to Laeur dialling.
    You think that the phone might have being lying in the grass for a large number of seconds before the call dropped?
    Where was that phone found?
    40 feet south of the T - a number of feet South of where they ended up outside John Good's porch.

    If that phone hit the grass, it hit it 40 feet South of the T.



    ReplyDelete
  3. Well Sling, it was very dark that night.

    Trayvon either circled back or hid in the shadows, because both parties say they were out of sight of each other.

    Unless you're saying a chubby Mexican caught a lean athletic young black man in a footrace when he had a huge head start... Are all the running backs in the NFL chubby Mexicans? You can certainly see my skepticism is warranted.

    The problem you have, regardless of this timeline, is PROVING beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman instigated the confrontation, but it's even worse than that for you.

    Once Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman, ground and pounding him into the concrete, (as eye witness and Z's injuries support) Zimmerman was reasonably in fear for his life or great bodily harm. Even if his actions MAY have caused this altercation or contributed to it in some unspecified or unproven way.

    The prosecution has the BURDEN OF PROOF. They can punch holes in Zimmerman's story here and there, but he may not remember everything exactly right. That is not PROOF he instigated anything. That is not PROOF he was NOT in fear for his life or great bodily harm while under Martin's unrelenting attack.

    It takes evidence, something, anything, to refute Zimmerman's story. Sure he got some of the details wrong, he'd been through a traumatic experience. People's memories play tricks on them all the time, especially under stress.

    That is hardly grounds for conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.



    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you for this detail work!

    Laser

    ReplyDelete
  5. "The real question is, with Trayvon 'out of sight' for those two minutes, why didn't he just go home?"

    Nope!
    The real question is,
    1)with Trayvon 'out of sight' "gone" (They always get away) - presumably via the back entrance
    2)with dark, cold and rain coming down
    Why didn't Zimmerman just go back to his truck warm dry immediately as he had agreed to the dispatcher's suggestion to meet at the mailboxes. They are just beyond his truck.
    Why is he still out in the dark cold and wet minutes later?
    Why did he suddenly decide that the incoming cops should call him to find out where he was at?

    What's this Hannity nonsense about "less than 30 seconds"?
    Why is Martin not running any more - but sort of skipping?
    Why does he tell Hannity that Martin was not running in fear?

    Why does he not tell Hannity that Martin had circled his truck?
    Why did he not tell the dispatcher that Martin had corcled the truck? The dispatcher had just asked him to tell him if 'the suspect' did anything. "He's freaking circling my freaking truck" might have been an appropriate answer.

    If Martin had indeed circled the truck with his hand in his waistband and confrontational body language - and then sort of skipped (as opposed to running) out of sight - was it not crazy and reckless to get out of the truck and head straight at the dark corner around which the apparently very threatening thug had "sort of skipped"?

    When he got out to the T, the dispatcher asked him for his home address. Zimmerman gave his address and phone number. Then he thought oops!. "I dont want to give that all out. I don't know where this kid is". Listen to him in the NEN.

    The "kid" had apparently just circled his truck with "his hand in his waistband" and with confrontational body language.
    Now Zimmerman realises that this apparently violent threatening thug could be still around and close enough in the dark to have overheard his address. Why the hell did he not run (not walk) for his truck immediately? That's what any reasonable person would have done. (Not that any reasonable person whould have been out there in the first place.)

    Could it be that he was not actually in fear?
    Alone in the dark with a threatening thug possibly nearby and watching him?
    He hangs around for over 3 minutes before things start to happen.
    What's he doing?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "What's he doing?"

    Nothing illegal. Probably looking around for the suspicious guy he had seen so he could tell the police when they arrived.

    Of course I always call the popo first when I go hunting those asshole fucking punks. That's just how creepy ass cracka's roll. It's ridiculous.

    He had lost sight of Martin and the dispatcher had asked him to tell what he was doing - twice...he was honestly trying to comply with what the dispatcher was saying.

    And even when he said, 'you don't need to do that' Zimmerman answered, "okay." Not "Screw you," not "go to hell," not "Imma gonna git this one!"

    Yeah, he probably looked around a little to see if he could see where this unknown guy went. Probably spent a minute looking up and down the pathways trying to see in the dark. A minor detail that shows no malice, hatred or ill will.

    No evidence he was in a confrontational mood or that he was looking for a confrontation. NONE. No evidence he did ANYTHING to Trayvon until he had to shoot him to save his own life.

    No evidence has another term used in court proceedings.

    it's called REASONABLE DOUBT

    ReplyDelete
  7. "ground and pounding him into the concrete"
    "while under Martin's unrelenting attack."

    This is not supported by eyewitness.
    John Good was clear under cross examination that he did not see punches or pounding. He only saw them for about 10 seconds or so, during which Martin was on top. FOr the beginning of that, they were both horizontal.
    He saw some sort of downward arm movement - which he said could have been "holding down".

    Zimmerman's slight injuries - which required no more medical attention than a washing - are not the result of unrelenting pounding.



    Zimmerman's action in getting out to follow ("are you following him? - Yeah") was reckless.
    His action in remaining in that dark area afrer he had expressed a realistion that 'the suspect' might be close by was reckless.
    A person died due to Zimmerman's recklessness.

    And what's this nonsense on Hannity - 6 months later and with MOM holding his hand - about "less than 30 seconds". They've had months to go over the timeline and the map. That's not forgetfulness and getting a few details wrong. That's blatant lying.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "He had lost sight of Martin and the dispatcher had asked him to tell what he was doing - twice...he was honestly trying to comply with what the dispatcher was saying."

    Listen to the NEN.
    Zimmerman tells the dispatcher the guy is "coming to check me out", "his hand in his waistband", "something in his hand", "don't know what his deal is".
    The dispatcher realises that this could mean violence, and asks Zimmerman to tell him if the guy does anything. Before he is finished saying this, Zimmerman breaks in to ask about "get an officer over here". The dispatcher patiently repeats his request.
    As in - 'Stop freaking out. Do what I asked. Tell me what is going on'

    Your "twice" is actually the dispatcher asking Zimmerman about the approach that the guy is making. End of.


    The moment that Zimmerman seems to calm down, the dispatcher loses all interest in what the guy might be doing. He doen't press for info. The conversation turns to determining Zimmerman's location. He's not asking about the suspects location or actions.

    Then "He's running" - "Which way" - "Down towards the back entrance".
    OK
    He's gone. The dispatcher enters that into the Event Report.
    Thank you citizen. The suspect is headed for the back entrance. We'll handle it from here. No more for you to do there. Thank you and good night.
    The dispatcher never asks again about the suspect. He's gone. Headed for the back entrance. What's to ask?


    ReplyDelete
  9. Sorry, I was going by John Good's original statement, not the one he changed after all the racial intimidation.

    No one wants that kind of trouble...look at the death threats Zimmerman and his family have had to deal with. He is the most hated man in America. Too much political pressure.

    But Good's original statement seems consistent with the evidence and Zimmerman's story, when he had no idea what anyone else would say.

    And I agree, although scary, Zimmerman's injuries turned out to be fairly superficial for the most part. Still, John Good told them to stop but Trayvon kept on, Zimmerman had no idea how much longer it would go on.

    So the question becomes

    what about the next injury? How bad would it have been?

    How many injuries does it take to meet the requirements of justifiable self defense?

    How severe must the injury be to meet the requirements of justifiable self defense?

    The answer to these questions will be very revealing to thinking and sentient beings.

    Others will struggle.

    oh, here's the code:

    a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
    (1)He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;

    http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

    ReplyDelete
  10. If anyone actually reads this minor blog...

    if they'd like some real analysis rather than this mindless tripe, they should check this out:

    State’s Closing Argument: Expert Analysis
    http://networkedblogs.com/N3CVu

    ReplyDelete
  11. Then there is the cover up of Trayvons criminal activity.


    Trayvon Martin’s Involvement In Local Burglaries Covered Up By Media, School, Police, Prosecutors
    http://patdollard.com/2013/06/trayvon-martins-involvement-in-local-burglaries-covered-up-by-media-school-police/

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Sorry, I was going by John Good's original statement, not the one he changed after all the racial intimidation. "

    So MOM moved to impeach his evidence? No?
    Do MOM read his original statement to him? No?
    You are saying that Good brazenly perjured himslf in a high-profile murder trial and that MOM did not call him on it.
    Did you watch MOM's cross?



    "But Good's original statement seems consistent with the evidence and Zimmerman's story,"
    It wasn't.
    Think about how long this purported beating would have lasted.
    It began around 7:15:43 - this the time that W8's call disconneced. It began some seconds earlier if we believe W8's account.
    17 seconds later, Lauer dialled 911.
    11 seconds after that, the dispatcher picked up the call.
    42 seconds after that, the shot is heard.
    The purported beating therefore lasted 1 minute 10 seconds.

    Why was Zimmerman's face not an unrecognisable pulp?
    Why was the back of his head not in a similar condition?
    Look at the photo taken just after the shooting and before the cops arrived. This was before he got cleaned up in any way. Has that head been bashed into the ground for over 1 minute?
    Why is the blood not smeared? Where is the grass and mud? He was supposed to have been on his back for over 1 minutes. Why is it running cleanly *down* from those minor cuts? All that bleeding happened when his head was upright and inclined slightly down.

    Why is he even still alive?
    How would it be possible for him to be up and walking around immediately afterwards?
    Why is the back of his jacket clean after 1 minute under their combined weights and his shimmying?

    The truth is that it was really dark out there. The only light source was Good's own porch light. It's not a floodlight. It lights the porch area only.
    The pair were on the ground about 20 feet away.


    What about Zimmerman's story that Martin went for the gun?
    By Zimmerman's account, it was both still in its holster behind his hip and concealed under his waistband. (Hint: It's called "concealed carry".)
    What might be visible would be the back of the handgrip. That's 0.8" wide and about 5" long. It's dark metal.
    But it's very dark.
    Martin could not either see or feel that gun - if it was in its holster.

    Martin had been followed by truck and by foot.
    The follower had made no attempt to explain what he was doing. When challenged - whether by Zimmerman's account or by W8's account - the stranger had gone for his waistband. Remember Zimmerman's "He's got his hand in his waistband"? What did that mean?

    To Martin, it would have looked as if "a forcible felony" was about to take place. In the circumstances of being followed in the dark we are definitely in the scope of "reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself"
    That would apply even if Zimmerman did not actually have the gun in his hand at the time.

    So:
    Martin is fighting to prevent this stranger-in-the-dark-who will-not-explain-his-following from using a weapon.
    Good says "Stop it!"
    Yeah right. Somebody says stop so Martin is expected to stop pinning the guy - who might well then use his weapon.


    ReplyDelete
  13. Earbuds. This small techno-gizmo seems to have been the key in this case. I'm here is Canada and even so it has been clear to me since this case made news in the Great White North that an injustice was done to a young man talking to a girl on his cellphone as he was making his way home with Skittles and Iced Tea.

    It made sense to me that someone who'd escaped a creepy guy in a truck would feel safe when he lost him off-road. Trayvon felt secure talking to Rachel on his cellphone until that same creepy guy stood between him and his Dad's house. In that missing two minutes, instead of getting in his car to meet police at the mailboxes or check out the back gate of the community where all of those axxholes who get away, get away, George Zimmerman set out on foot... Armed with a concealed weapon and two flashlights he entered the virtually unlit area known as the dog walk with intent to catch his 'suspect'. Without a clue that he was standing between a young man and his home Zimmerman proceeded to attempt a citizen's arrest. Those earbuds come in about now. Imagine feeling safe, not being able to hear the approach of a stalker. When you finally see him there's no choice but confrontation. As for Zimmerman, what was going through his head might have been something like, "What a hero I'm going to be." That is, until the suspect ran and fought back with every fibre in his being, leaving the girl on the phone hanging. Trayvon's only weapon was the sidewalk, which was there for the creepy man to use if he hadn't had a bigger, better weapon at his disposal. It is my belief, arrived at by logic with the puzzle before me, that Zimmerman, when he shot Trayvon, even though neighbours were coming out of their homes, the threat of concrete was several feet away and police were coming, did so because he wanted to. And the idiot, it's a shame there's not charge for stupid, suffered injuries to his nose and the back of his head due to recoil from his no longer concealed gun. After he killed the young man, his mind began to race to the lessons learned in college. Self-defence. I'll say it was self defence, he thought to himself. "Is my head bleeding?" he asked someone on the scene. He knew the key protections under the law and from that moment on, gave statements that would support his claim. Truth be damned.

    That Zimmerman got off and will walk free was a stroke of luck. He didn't know that there was a girl on the phone, let alone that her lack of education would make her testimony less believable to the jury. And it just goes on from there. Nobody checking his face for GSR. No one searching his truck or even ascertaining its location that night. Then you have a balky ME and the cover of the rain and the dark...

    Zimmerman will go home to his wife with his concealed automatic weapon at his side, even when they shop together at Target. Lesson learned? Anyone who kills the main witness to a murder, the victim, thereby eliminating the only voice that could speak out against them, can seek life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness with impunity.

    In Canada we have very similar gun laws, but what we don't have is a gun culture. Most people here do not bear arms. Coincidentally, or not, our crime rate is lower. God Bless America.

    ReplyDelete
  14. One more thing... You have a terrific blog. So many people, like me, have some reason for feeling sad about today's not guilty verdict. To me, Zimmerman represented the bullies in my life and in the lives of my children. Trayvon represents the son I never had (I have four smart and beautiful daughters who have been following this case with me) my nephews, the boys who have come and gone from my house at my daughters' whims, and the boys I work with as an art teacher. Boys should be able to walk home in the evening without being stalked, harassed and shot.

    You have a keen mind. I'm sure you'll continue to apply it where it is most needed. I found your blog after I'd already figured out how things went down on that dark and rainy night in Florida. But it was a real relief to know that I was not alone. Thank you for that.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi. Do you have a copy of the event report for witness 18 when she called 911? Her name is Jayne Surdyka. I would like to know the time that she connected to the Sanford police 911 phone system.

    ReplyDelete