they pretty much meet up back at his vehicle which prolly was sitting there with the lights on? Seems like a pretty easy location to avoid.

Only a matter of time before this happens.

And then brawled from the back of his vehicle around a large multi-unit building into the backyard?

I'm going to go with "no chance in hell" on that one.

Nope.

I didn't say that was how to charge Zimmerman. I said, in response to far too many dimwits in this thread, that Zimmerman was not "acting in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch Captain", because he was not acting as an NWC in any way at all. He was acting as a vigilante. I believe I proved my point in the last post, go read it again.

What's really sad is how you guys can't read or comprehend simple English.

And on your "stopping a crime" note, NW doesn't address stopping a crime in progress, and I'm sure they would not object on any grounds other than safety and the possibility of screwing up and/or making things worse, nor would I. In theory, go for it.

On the other hand, I feel compelled to point out something that I imagined should be completely obvious to all but the most brain dead among you (I was mistaken), which is this: what TM was doing was, in common parlance, "walking along minding his own freaking business", which is NOT A FREAKING CRIME.

Repeat after me:

TRAYVON MARTIN WAS NOT IN THE ACT OF COMMITTING A CRIME.

Write it on a chalkboard 100 times, and when it sinks in, come back and talk.

You need to stop analyzing this as if TM was COMMITTING A CRIME. Since he was NOT COMMITTING A CRIME. There is a much different standard of care required when approaching someone who is committing a crime, as opposed to someone who "looks suspicious". Think it through.

Someone who "looks suspicious" to someone who thinks black people many times "look suspicious".

You can't really go from the "similarity score" they give to the chances of it being the same person because the former is independent of the selection procedure and the latter depends critically on it. Which is basically why they use the % similarity metric. What you could ask is the chances of 2 random people having a similarity score of 48% or higher and 1 random person having 48% or lower between 2 different recordings.

I don't think you know what vigilante means. Either that, or you just like making stuff up.

Really? Then you should get a job with the Sanford Police Dept, because so far, they haven't been able to prove this. You must be really good and smart to boot. Congrats!

What's sad is people making statements of certitude when they can't possibly be sure or have all the facts.

Case in point.

I'm not saying he did do anything wrong or wasn't minding his own business. I wasn't there. Neither were you. So maybe you should withhold judgment and refrain from sounding so certain until you have all the facts.

Hint: Just because the media and a lot of people are saying one thing, doesn't make it a fact. Maybe you should write that on a chalk board a 100 times.

This is irrelevant

I need to see that map of where things took place again, but it still seems bizarre for TM to get away then somehow run into the guy you are running frm as that guy is retreating to his vehicle.

Which is why many of us don't believe he was retreating to his vehicle.

You should probably go do that then.

Eeeeeeeeexactly.

.

Not if the map with projected routes is accurate. GZ doesn't double back really, but on the map he turns back in a direction toward his car after he rounds a building.

Just as a note to the map, GZ could've been walking back to his car from the point South of where the killing took place - just via a different route (he obv knows the area well, really not a stretch for him to take a different route back to his car). That's where they'd run into each other.

Maybe I just need to get my daily ban quota for this thread filled in the mornings. Then it's nice and quiet for the rest of the day.

There is no way the route on the map is accurate. First, it has the location of the vehicle wrong. He parked the car much closer to the where the sidewalk going to the back of the houses is located.

Second, if you listed to GZ's 911 call, when he after he gets out of the car, there is another 2 minutes on the call. Even if you assume that he confronts TM immediately after the call ends, both he and TM would have walked much further than that map indicates (this also ignores that both were likely running for a bit). Thus, I think either TM had to hide for a while or double back.

GZ either had to stop followin TM for a while, or wander around to be on the phone for two minutes (both of which support his claim that he lost TM).

What is your reasoning on this point?

In the 9-1-1 call he says he's parked past the mailboxes (the little house next to the clubhouse). The represented vehicle location makes sense given that condition (give or take), rather than saying he's down the street.

Streetview, minus markings

People take it for granted if you cut them the tiniest amount of slack

In the call GZ states "When you come to the clubhouse, you come straight in and you go left. Actually, you would go past the clubhouse."

. . .

"Um, if they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse and, uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck."

The map shows him parked right across from the clubhouse when he ways he's past it. Also, since he states that they need to pass the clubhouse and go left and then they will see his truck, he clearly has to be further down the street on the part that runs East/West.

In the heat of the moment, little differences like that aren't a big deal imo

I'm confused? Did this map come from GZ's statements, 911 calls, a theory or what?

libural media

b