Kel-Tec PF-9
Only
minutes after George Zimmerman made a phone call to the Sanford Police
Department to report Trayvon Martin as a suspicious person, their paths briefly
crossed and Martin’s life suddenly ended. Since it became a major story
in the media people all over the world have wondered what really happened that
night. According to Zimmerman, he killed Martin in self-defense shortly
after Martin tried to take his firearm. Zimmerman claims that Martin went for
his concealed weapon when it became exposed during a struggle.
Now, with the trial fully underway, new clues have emerged from previously released evidence. They cast doubt on
Zimmerman's assertion that Martin tried to take his gun, which he says was in his holster. The clues arise from the very call that the neighborhood
watchman made moments before the shooting. While it’s not a secret, it is
a mystery that the evidence isn't more widely known. Especially, since the call
revealing it was released and broadcast repeatedly in the news. One possible
explanation is that listeners have been distracted by conversation. The
startling clues are faintly heard in the background of the on-going dialogue
between Zimmerman and the dispatcher. I’m not a detective nor am I an attorney.
Neither am I familiar with all of the prosecution’s discovery, but I
would venture to say that one of the most damning pieces of evidence in the
murder case against George Zimmerman is that recorded phone call. After
carefully listening to it again, I am convinced that the distinct and
compelling noise heard in it is the smoking gun. It’s those sounds that likely
led to the second-degree murder charge against him and could very well lead to
a conviction.
Listen
for yourself and decide. (Stereo headphones enhances the quality of
sound).
At the
2:00 minute mark of the recording Zimmerman is still in his vehicle while
giving directions for arriving officers to get to his location. Within a few seconds he
abruptly uses an expletive as he states for the first time that Martin is
running. A second later what sounds like the following noises are heard, a
vehicle door opening, an open door alert sounding, and the door of a vehicle
closing. Next Zimmerman’s voice is heard slightly straining as he
continues to talk to the dispatcher while moving to get out of a vehicle.
Apparently tracking Martin movements, he reports to the dispatcher where
the teen is running. The dispatcher then asks Zimmerman if he’s following
him. Zimmerman responds, “Yeah.” The dispatcher says, “Okay, we don’t need you
to do that” and Zimmerman’s says, “Okay.” As there is no obvious change in the background
noise, there is no way to confirm that Zimmerman discontinued following Martin.
The dispatcher says, “Alright sir what is your name?” “George,” Zimmerman
responds. For a second time Zimmerman states that Martin is running. The
dispatcher asks Zimmerman his last name. When he responds, the evidence
that has been largely unheard by listeners boldly speaks, perhaps as a chilling
prelude to the heart-wrenching screams heard on the 911 call shortly before
Martin is shot. At the 2:56 mark on the recording as Zimmerman states his
last name with particular emphasis, what sounds like the mechanisms of a gun
are clearly heard. Almost simultaneously, Zimmerman seemingly preoccupied with doing something sounds frustrated, as he utters two words in a very low voice. One sounds like the
expletive, “s**t” and the other is “no.” A few seconds later tapping noises are heard. The noises are heard
intermittently for approximately 22 seconds until the 3:23 mark on the
recording. The call ends shortly thereafter.
It's circumstantial audio evidence, but it can be just as compelling as visual evidence. Obviously the prosecution would have to convince a jury that the noise heard is Zimmerman preparing his firearm. If gun experts can testify that the sounds are consistent with preparing that type of gun for shooting, it would be a start toward persuading a jury. Furthermore, if they could re-create the same kind of noise heard, using Zimmerman's own gun, it would be very powerful testimony. Since there is no visual evidence, the prosecution would also likely argue that the context in which these sounds occur make the accusations that Zimmerman was getting his gun ready for use more probable. How Zimmerman's weapon was introduced into the confrontation is an important point. If Zimmerman prepared his gun with the intent to pursue Martin without provocation, at that point he engaged in premeditated criminal activity. If that's the way it happened, Zimmerman's unlawful behavior subsequently led to the death of Martin, who was unarmed, not committing a crime, and running away from him.
It's circumstantial audio evidence, but it can be just as compelling as visual evidence. Obviously the prosecution would have to convince a jury that the noise heard is Zimmerman preparing his firearm. If gun experts can testify that the sounds are consistent with preparing that type of gun for shooting, it would be a start toward persuading a jury. Furthermore, if they could re-create the same kind of noise heard, using Zimmerman's own gun, it would be very powerful testimony. Since there is no visual evidence, the prosecution would also likely argue that the context in which these sounds occur make the accusations that Zimmerman was getting his gun ready for use more probable. How Zimmerman's weapon was introduced into the confrontation is an important point. If Zimmerman prepared his gun with the intent to pursue Martin without provocation, at that point he engaged in premeditated criminal activity. If that's the way it happened, Zimmerman's unlawful behavior subsequently led to the death of Martin, who was unarmed, not committing a crime, and running away from him.
Raymond, you sound like a reasonable person but are becoming a victim of your own bias. A tragedy happened on Feb 26th, compounding it by refusing to see the truth, such as it is, does not help. Actually, it makes things worse. You have allowed your personal beliefs cloud your judgement, as it has people who are trying to prove Zimmerman's innocence.
ReplyDeleteThis theory about the gun, is not evidence, you know that, there is no way possible to conclusively determine that the sounds are a gun being cocked, as many want to believe. Not to mention the gun still being loaded when it was removed from Zimmerman. You say that when Zimmerman was interrogated, a white lie to make him confessed was not used by the police, but if you take the time to read the interrogation transcripts, or listen to the tapes, you will see that not to be the case. In fact, at one point Zimmerman was told that the whole thing was taped on camera, do you know what Zimmerman said, thank God, it will prove what I say is true.
I was once accused of a crime, and it appeared at first glace that I was guilty, yet when all the evidence came out, I was cleared because I was innocent and no crime had actually been committed. I was detained, accused, shunned by some co-workers and my superiors, over an error, it is a humiliating experience. You know what that taught me, that sometimes the easiest answers and explanations are the truth, there isn't always a bogeyman hiding in the closet.
Take your time do what I did look for evidence of Zimmerman's innocence and weigh it against the rest, you will see that everything is not as black or white as some would like to make it. If you like here is a good source for information on this case: TalkLeft.com they are very impartial and are lawyers who examined the evidence without prejudice, check it out.
Thanks for taking the time to visit my blog and for commenting on this article. It’s ironic that you would accuse me of being a victim of my own bias then suggest that I do like you and try to look for evidence of Zimmerman’s innocence. He is innocent until proven guilty, but to look for evidence of his innocence and to conclude that he is without first weighing it against known facts suggest that a person favors finding him innocent which is bias.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, the theory about the gun isn’t evidence, but the recorded call with what sounds like the mechanisms of a gun is evidence. You yourself never said that it didn’t sound like a gun. You said it can’t be proven. Whether or not you feel it can be proven doesn’t mean that it wasn’t gun. As a defense, it’s understandable why a person who is looking for reasons to find Zimmerman innocent would say that it can’t be proven that it was a gun. You are not looking for evidence to find him guilty nor are you open to evidence that suggest that he is either. Logical thinking people would likely conclude that because Zimmerman had a gun and the noise on the call sounds like a gun that it was a gun.
You right I didn't say it sounded like a gun, because as a gun owner, it didn't. As for it being evidence, you are incorrect it would only become evidence if submitted at a hearing or trial, and allowed by a judge. Anyhow, go back to the tape listen to what you believe is a gun, then remember that his gun was found with 7 bullets, the capacity for the gun is 8 rounds, 7 in the cartridge + 1 in the chamber, that meant that it was 1 round short, but if he was cocking the gun, as suggested he would be short more rounds. The evidence does not back this.
DeleteRobert, I know that people want to find GZ guilty or believe he is guilty, and they will come up with some of the wildest theories, some even reasonable, to crucify Zimmerman. When I said to look for signs that Zimmerman was innocent, my intent was for you to weigh the evidence that proves his innocence. In order words put yourself in the other persons shoes, and then use that to measure against any incriminating evidence.
You like me at the beginning were looking for things to prove Zimmerman guilty, so at lot of evidence that was contrary to that was not being considered. It is not enough that the law considers Zimmerman innocent until proven guilty, we need to view both sides and weigh the evidence accordingly. If we start from the premise that someone is guilty, even if the evidence does not gets us to that conclusion, does that not makes us guilty of the same thing that our civil rights leaders fought so hard for, equality in the eyes of the law. Just because the roles are reversed it does not make it right.
The reason I'm saying all of this is because, what happened was a tragedy, but is one that will continue to happen if we keep trying to find wild theories, ignore the facts or just keep being stubborn and refuse to accept what is in front of us. The is a problem in the inner cities with our young people, they result to violence to solve any perceived grievance, damn the circumstances, I have seen, hell I have lived it, I am not a saint. It needs to stop, for our kids future, conflict resolution and negating violence must be taught. Excusing the behavior, because we feel it was provoked, does not justify the violence.