George Zimmerman Trial Thread (Found Not Guilty Jesus help us...)

[stringer bell]

articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-07-18/news/os-zimmerman-alternate-juror-20130717_1_juror-b-37-george-zimmerman-17-year-old-trayvon

Zimmerman alternate juror says he doesn't understand post-verdict protests

An alternate juror in the George Zimmerman murder case spoke out Wednesday night on WOFL-Channel 35, saying he doesn't understand the post-verdict protests that have spread across the U.S.

"People are going to be angry no matter what the verdict was," the man told reporter Valerie Boey, adding that he doesn't understand why some people think shooting victim Trayvon Martin's civil rights were violated.

The man, whose face was obscured, said he wanted to identify himself but he was concerned for his safety. Circuit Judge Debra Nelson has not made the jurors' names public.

The alternate juror said he supported the six jurors who decided on a not-guilty verdict the case, whom he described as "like sisters" to him. He said they made a lawful decision when they found Zimmerman not guilty of murdering 17-year-old Trayvon in Sanford last year.

Trayvon, who was black, was visiting his father and his father's girlfriend in Zimmerman's neighborhood.

The alternate juror said he did not agree with the assessment of juror B-37, who was critical of Zimmerman for getting out of his sport utility vehicle to follow Trayvon in Zimmerman's gated community. The confrontation that ended in Trayvon's death occurred after Zimmerman got out of the SUV.

"He had the right to be where he was," the alternate juror said. "I don't think he had to go back to his car."

The man also said:

•He was surprised that juror B-37 spoke out on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 program on Monday and Tuesday, saying he thought it was too soon after the trial.

•He thought it was George Zimmerman's voice crying out for help on a 911 tape during a struggle between Trayvon and him. Zimmerman's parents testified that it was their son's voice. Trayvon's parents testified that it was their son's.

Smh @ another tone deaf cracker.. If he wouldve been on jury.. they would have comeback with verdict in like 8hrs instead of 16hrs...

 

[playmaker88]

Yeah some of these white people live on another planet

 

[Wild Willie in the A]

So I guess Jimmy Carter is racist now too??
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/politica...cted-word-jimmy-carter-zimmerman-jury-was-ri/

An unexpected word from Jimmy Carter: The Zimmerman jury was right

By Jim Galloway and Daniel Malloy

In an interview with Brenda Wood of 11Alive last night, former President Jimmy Carter swam upstream against many other Democrats, declaring that the jury that refused to convict George Zimmerman for the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was right.

The former president put the blame on the prosecution. Said Carter:

"I think the jury made the right decision based in the evidence presented, because the prosecution inadvertently set the standard so high that the jury had to be convinced that it was a deliberate act by Zimmerman and that he was not defending himself and so forth. It's not a moral question, it was a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented."

On the racial aspects of the trial:

“I can’t allege that the six jurors, all of whom are women, are not just as sensitive about the race issue as I am. Or that you are. I don’t know them. But the judge warned them over and over that they had to listen to the evidence only, not to their own feelings about race. And since neither side [was] willing to bring in the race issue, I think – as far as the jury was concerned – they could not consider that.”

"....I've seen outbreaks of this before, in California when a man was beaten up by police and when Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. There were terrible race riots. And I think, eventually, no matter how deep the moral feelings and personal feelings might be among African-Americans or others -- with time passing, they start seeing what we can do about the present and the future and put aside the feelings about the past. I think that’s what’s going to happen in our country."

 

[playmaker88]

Who said he was racist.. Oblivious. Almost as bad as being racist.

 

[gorilla]

Once and for all,

zim didn't get off because of "the laws"

zim didn't get off because of a weak prosectuion (although they were weak)

zim didn't get off because the defense was the goat

zim got off simply because of the jury was a bunch of scary women, 5 of whom were white and the last is suspected to be hispanic. This trial was the equivalent of a black man on trial in the south during the 1800s

The fact that Trayvon was young, black and fit the image of a "scary thug" in their mind, was the reason for their decision. He was acquitted due to fear.

How do you admit zim story sounded embellished and FABRICATED but you still give him the pass? Juror B37 is an idiot and I bet omara,west or her lawyer husband told her to SFTU and that's why she "changed her mind" on the book and all of a sudden wants privacy. Naw bitch you was all over a few days ago.

 

[playmaker88]

Omara using that white woman who was home during the burglary as a prop... couple with the "intimidating" pictures of trayvon

leads a juror to say

"His heart was in the right place"

 

[can'tyoutell]

Omara using that white woman who was home during the burglary as a prop... couple with the "intimidating" pictures of trayvon

leads a juror to say

"His heart was in the right place"

I don't think these jurors came to a judgement based on law.

 

[playmaker88]

Omara using that white woman who was home during the burglary as a prop... couple with the "intimidating" pictures of trayvon

leads a juror to say

"His heart was in the right place"

I don't think these jurors came to a judgement based on law.

Thats clear as day.. it was based on perceptions... Zimmerman was the victim in their eyes..

 

[cobbland]

Oscar

9 hours ago

Fox Sports on Johhny Manziel:

2) He’s just a 20-year-old KID living and learning.

Fox News on Trayvon Martin:

A 17-year-old MAN who deserved to die.

Got to love America.

ShareFlag

2kooljerk Grok Like

Reply

rickyoku

rickyoku

8 hours ago

@Oscar Your above comments are the WORSE comments I have ever read!!!

ShareFlag

LikeReply

Crimson_Domination

Crimson_Domination

6 hours ago

@Oscar You MUST be a brainwashed liberal

ShareFlag

LikeReply

oumike

oumike

3 hours ago

@Oscar

get over it already...Zimmerman was found NOT GUILTY...perhaps next time a person is on top of someone...beating them...they will chose to get off when told to do so...

ShareFlag

LikeReply

Grok

Grok

2 hours ago

@Oscar Oscar, one of your examples is real life, and the other is Aggie football. Get your priorities straight!
http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefoo...ning-passing-camp-excuse-justin-bieber-071713

 

[fuc_i_look_like]

To gold_certificate:

When i said the facts speak for themselves, I was specifically talking about Zimmerman continuing to follow Trayvon. I wasn't talking about the entire case. We were arguing whether it had been established if Zimmerman continued to follow after he was told not to by dispatch. (The next argument is Dispatch doesn't have authority to give orders, we aren't talking about that right now.) So lets establish Zimmerman following Trayvon after the call ended. Trayvon's body was found 40 feet away from Zimmerman's car. That is where the physical confrontation happened. The call ended after Zimmerman reported Trayvon running and expressed a want to keep following him. We know the desire to continue following is there. We know he had been pursuing him before. Soon after that, he found him again, got out of his car, walked 40 feet in the direction of Trayvon, and the altercation happened. But he wasn't following him anymore, he just randomly parked his car 40 feet away from a street sign to look at it. It's all a coincidence.

Let me ask you something. What would be considered proof to you in this scenario? Do we need a video camera there? That wouldn't prove it either based on your argument. Following Trayvon isn't proof of following him, right? He could have been taking a stroll down the block just for the heck of it. We would only be speculating he was following him, he was just walking in the same direction is all.

man don't even waste your keystrokes with this gold_certificate character. I don't think he's even Black.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

To gold_certificate:

When i said the facts speak for themselves, I was specifically talking about Zimmerman continuing to follow Trayvon. I wasn't talking about the entire case. We were arguing whether it had been established if Zimmerman continued to follow after he was told not to by dispatch. (The next argument is Dispatch doesn't have authority to give orders, we aren't talking about that right now.) So lets establish Zimmerman following Trayvon after the call ended. Trayvon's body was found 40 feet away from Zimmerman's car. That is where the physical confrontation happened. The call ended after Zimmerman reported Trayvon running and expressed a want to keep following him. We know the desire to continue following is there. We know he had been pursuing him before. Soon after that, he found him again, got out of his car, walked 40 feet in the direction of Trayvon, and the altercation happened. But he wasn't following him anymore, he just randomly parked his car 40 feet away from a street sign to look at it. It's all a coincidence.

Let me ask you something. What would be considered proof to you in this scenario? Do we need a video camera there? That wouldn't prove it either based on your argument. Following Trayvon isn't proof of following him, right? He could have been taking a stroll down the block just for the heck of it. We would only be speculating he was following him, he was just walking in the same direction is all.

Proof here would be something that rules out alternatives--such as eyewitness testimony; rather than speculation like the bolded, which is a mere interpreting of facts to reach a desired conclusion.

What you're doing is the equivalent of saying, "A pigeon was observed on the ground at point A, and then observed again--40 feet away on the ground--at point B, 5 minutes later. Therefore, the bird must've flown directly from point A to point B.".

^^Sure, that's a possible scenario, but there was enough time between observations for there to be a myriad of other possible routes the pigeon took; walking included.

Now, in the absence of direct observation, providing a scenario with no plausible alternatives would also count as proof.

So if the pigeon was observed at point B after only 3 seconds instead of 300 seconds, this would rule out walking and indirect flight paths; because the pigeon would have to greatly exceed pigeon walking speeds and flight speeds to do so.

You've simply offered one scenario while ignoring alternatives.

This is why it's speculation.

 

[can'tyoutell]

Your analogy is missing the fact that the pigeon was following the bird before we stopped observing.

proof

[proof] Show IPA

noun

1.

evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.

We have evidence that he was pursuing Trayvon before the call ended. We know he got out of his car. He started walking, he even says this himself. An altercation happens 40 feet from his car. This clearly demonstrates he was following him. There are no reasonable alternatives to explain these facts.

The alternative is he got out of the car to look at the street sign. That's the alternative. That's what he said, and that is the only other possibility for this particular case. Now let me show you, again, why I ruled out that alternative. I have a part time driving job right now, where I have to remember lots of streets. When I come to street I don't know, I don't park 40 feet away to look at it. I can either drive up close to look at it, or drive up close to it, get out, and then look at it (never done the latter.) If it is dark and I have to find an address and can't see them on houses, I may get out to get a closer look. Zimmerman wasn't looking for an address, he was checking the street sign. This alternative can safely be ruled out. It just does not make as much sense as the other version of the story.

 

[nycdiesel]

Reading some of these comments its like an open season on racism

 

[Hyde Parke]

.

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

The man has a history of abuse, dear.

When someone has a history of abuse, and shout threats, it's grounds for defense.

Also, it was a single warning shot that didn't kill him.

And yes, it applies under stand your ground because of his past abusive history and the perceived threat to her well-being.

The bolded perfectly fits Florida's legal definition of "aggravated assault":

784.011 Assault.—

(1) An “assault” is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.

(2) Whoever commits an assault shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

History.—s. 5, Feb. 10, 1832; RS 2400; GS 3226; RGS 5059; CGL 7161; s. 1, ch. 70-88; s. 729, ch 71-136; s. 17, ch. 74-383; s. 7, ch. 75-298; s. 171, ch. 91-224.

Note.—Former s. 784.02.

784.021 Aggravated assault.—

(1) An “aggravated assault” is an assault:

(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or

(b) With an intent to commit a felony.

(2) Whoever commits an aggravated assault shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.—s. 2, ch. 3275, 1881; RS 2402; GS 3228; RGS 5061; CGL 7163; s. 1, ch. 29709, 1955; s. 1, ch. 57-345; s. 731, ch. 71-136; s. 18, ch. 74-383; s. 8, ch. 75-298.

Note.—Former s. 784.04.

It doesn't fit "stand your ground", because fleeing to her car counts as retreating from the situation. It would've been under "stand your ground" if she had the gun on her when he first threatened her and shot at him then.

She was also charged with battery for a separate assault on him, months after she shot toward him and his sons; which she plead "no contest" to.

lol. fleeing to her car? I wouldn't call that fleeing. She went to her car, on her property and retrieved the gun. How do you configure that as retreating? by that same logic, if a burgler entered her home and she went to her garage and got her gun and shot him that would also count as retreating? its nonsense either way as the law says no duty to retreat, not that if you do retreat and return then you cant use it as your defense. it says just what it says "no duty to retreat" nothing more, nothing less. The fact remains, is she felt her life was in danger, she acted upon her fear, which under the law, that should have protected her.

The Florida law is a self-defense, self-protection law. It has four key components:

• It establishes that law-abiding residents and visitors may legally presume the threat of bodily harm or death from anyone who breaks into a residence or occupied vehicle and may use defensive force, including deadly force, against the intruder.

•In any other place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

•In either case, a person using any force permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action and cannot be arrested unless a law enforcement agency determines there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.

•If a civil action is brought and the court finds the defendant to be immune based on the parameters of the law, the defendant will be awarded all costs of defense

 

[Hyde Parke]

under 776.013,Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

she would not be justified under 2a 2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person.

this fits the scenario better than this retreating nonsense.

 

[Maximus Rex]

I see that some artists said they ain't performing in florida until they change the law.

There's nothing wrong with the "Stand Your Ground," law. If anything it's needed more than ever because some random white folks are going to feel as if they have a green light to arbitrarily fuck with black people, instigate a fight, pop said black person, then get acquitted of the charges if they're even indicted at all. Niggas have to remember that self-defense statues work both ways.

Oh, and people who stand for Tray should also look at this Boycott Florida Tourism petition.
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/boycott-florida-tourism.fb28?source=s.fb&r_by=6115185

Rex STRONGLY SUPPORTS AND COURAGES anybody who doesn't condone this fuckery to get serious and boycott Florida for a year, to maybe a year and half. That means not fucking with a lot of shit we like, Disney, the Heat, (sorry Lebron, D Wade, and Bosh, but niggas need to make a statement. No trips to spring break and for niggas like me that means not supporting Marvel movies or buying Marvel products.

So I guess Jimmy Carter is racist now too??
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/politica...cted-word-jimmy-carter-zimmerman-jury-was-ri/

An unexpected word from Jimmy Carter: The Zimmerman jury was right

By Jim Galloway and Daniel Malloy

In an interview with Brenda Wood of 11Alive last night, former President Jimmy Carter swam upstream against many other Democrats, declaring that the jury that refused to convict George Zimmerman for the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was right.

The former president put the blame on the prosecution. Said Carter:

"I think the jury made the right decision based in the evidence presented, because the prosecution inadvertently set the standard so high that the jury had to be convinced that it was a deliberate act by Zimmerman and that he was not defending himself and so forth. It's not a moral question, it was a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented."

On the racial aspects of the trial:

Like I said before and Pres. Carter confirms it, the Special Prosecutor, (I've recently found out that it was a special prosecutor that was appointed by Florida's governor,) that indicted Zimmer, (so you know the nigga had an agenda,) overcharged Zimmerman and people with knowledge of the law knows this.

“I can’t allege that the six jurors, all of whom are women, are not just as sensitive about the race issue as I am. Or that you are. I don’t know them. But the judge warned them over and over that they had to listen to the evidence only, not to their own feelings about race. And since neither side [was] willing to bring in the race issue, I think – as far as the jury was concerned – they could not consider that.”

All of those subconscious stereotypes about black males can into play. Why is that Zimmerman can instigate a situation, start getting his ass whooped, overreact and not be held accountable for it?

[/quote]

Once and for all,

zim didn't get off because of "the laws"

zim didn't get off because of a weak prosectuion (although they were weak)

zim didn't get off because the defense was the goat

zim got off simply because of the jury was a bunch of scary women, 5 of whom were white and the last is suspected to be hispanic. This trial was the equivalent of a black man on trial in the south during the 1800s

The fact that Trayvon was young, black and fit the image of a "scary thug" in their mind, was the reason for their decision. He was acquitted due to fear.

How do you admit zim story sounded embellished and FABRICATED but you still give him the pass? Juror B37 is an idiot and I bet omara,west or her lawyer husband told her to SFTU and that's why she "changed her mind" on the book and all of a sudden wants privacy. Naw bitch you was all over a few days ago.

Dude, all of those factors come into play because the prosecution blazed a trail that it wanted the jurors to tread upon.

Once and for all, zim didn't get off because of "the laws"

Dude, this is the secondary why Zimmerman walked. Like Pres. Carter said, "the prosecution set an incredibly high standard for themselves." These are trained professionals who have gone through three years of law, possibly participated on their high schools, colleges, and law schools, moot court and mock trial trials, interned, on top of years of experience with D. A.'s office. You mean to tell me that they didn't know from jump they knew the M2 was excessive and they lacked the proper evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt at trial? You my friend at putting too much faith in the fact that prosecutors had Trayvon best interest at heart.

zim didn't get off because of a weak prosectuion (although they were weak)

You're implying that the jury had pre-determined decision in mind which isn't true. The initial vote was

Two for acquittal

Two for the manslaughter beef

Two for the Murder 2

Now if the prosecution had argued the correct points, such as the angle of the gun, how does getting you ass whooped in a fight justified being killed and how excessive the act was. The outcome would have probably been different. You don't give people the opportunity the give into their predjuices and biases.

 

[can'tyoutell]

I had my facts wrong. Trayvon's body wasn't found 40 feet from the car, it was found 40 feet from where Zimmerman claims the altercation happened. Here is a map of where Zimmerman claims it happened and where Trayvon's body was found.http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023274981

That map shows he got out of his car and walked a long ways and got behind in between what looks like an apartment complex. He said he was looking for a street address. This appears to be the back way Jeantel mentioned Trayvon was traveling. It looks like he went directly to the area where he saw Trayvon run so that he could give an address as to where Trayvon was. We know he was following him up to this point. He says he turned around after dispatch told him to, and claimed that's when Trayvon attacked him.

 

[BIRGGin]

Two for acquittal

Two for the manslaughter beef

Two for the Murder 2

I thought it was three for acquittal, one for manslaughter, one for murder 2.

 

[gorilla]

I see that some artists said they ain't performing in florida until they change the law.

There's nothing wrong with the "Stand Your Ground," law. If anything it's needed more than ever because some random white folks are going to feel as if they have a green light to arbitrarily fuck with black people, instigate a fight, pop said black person, then get acquitted of the charges if they're even indicted at all. Niggas have to remember that self-defense statues work both ways.

Oh, and people who stand for Tray should also look at this Boycott Florida Tourism petition.
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/boycott-florida-tourism.fb28?source=s.fb&r_by=6115185

Rex STRONGLY SUPPORTS AND COURAGES anybody who doesn't condone this fuckery to get serious and boycott Florida for a year, to maybe a year and half. That means not fucking with a lot of shit we like, Disney, the Heat, (sorry Lebron, D Wade, and Bosh, but niggas need to make a statement. No trips to spring break and for niggas like me that means not supporting Marvel movies or buying Marvel products.

So I guess Jimmy Carter is racist now too??
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/politica...cted-word-jimmy-carter-zimmerman-jury-was-ri/

An unexpected word from Jimmy Carter: The Zimmerman jury was right

By Jim Galloway and Daniel Malloy

In an interview with Brenda Wood of 11Alive last night, former President Jimmy Carter swam upstream against many other Democrats, declaring that the jury that refused to convict George Zimmerman for the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was right.

The former president put the blame on the prosecution. Said Carter:

"I think the jury made the right decision based in the evidence presented, because the prosecution inadvertently set the standard so high that the jury had to be convinced that it was a deliberate act by Zimmerman and that he was not defending himself and so forth. It's not a moral question, it was a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented."

On the racial aspects of the trial:

Like I said before and Pres. Carter confirms it, the Special Prosecutor, (I've recently found out that it was a special prosecutor that was appointed by Florida's governor,) that indicted Zimmer, (so you know the nigga had an agenda,) overcharged Zimmerman and people with knowledge of the law knows this.

“I can’t allege that the six jurors, all of whom are women, are not just as sensitive about the race issue as I am. Or that you are. I don’t know them. But the judge warned them over and over that they had to listen to the evidence only, not to their own feelings about race. And since neither side [was] willing to bring in the race issue, I think – as far as the jury was concerned – they could not consider that.”

All of those subconscious stereotypes about black males can into play. Why is that Zimmerman can instigate a situation, start getting his ass whooped, overreact and not be held accountable for it?

Once and for all,

zim didn't get off because of "the laws"

zim didn't get off because of a weak prosectuion (although they were weak)

zim didn't get off because the defense was the goat

zim got off simply because of the jury was a bunch of scary women, 5 of whom were white and the last is suspected to be hispanic. This trial was the equivalent of a black man on trial in the south during the 1800s

The fact that Trayvon was young, black and fit the image of a "scary thug" in their mind, was the reason for their decision. He was acquitted due to fear.

How do you admit zim story sounded embellished and FABRICATED but you still give him the pass? Juror B37 is an idiot and I bet omara,west or her lawyer husband told her to SFTU and that's why she "changed her mind" on the book and all of a sudden wants privacy. Naw bitch you was all over a few days ago.

Dude, all of those factors come into play because the prosecution blazed a trail that it wanted the jurors to tread upon.

Once and for all, zim didn't get off because of "the laws"

Dude, this is the secondary why Zimmerman walked. Like Pres. Carter said, "the prosecution set an incredibly high standard for themselves." These are trained professionals who have gone through three years of law, possibly participated on their high schools, colleges, and law schools, moot court and mock trial trials, interned, on top of years of experience with D. A.'s office. You mean to tell me that they didn't know from jump they knew the M2 was excessive and they lacked the proper evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt at trial? You my friend at putting too much faith in the fact that prosecutors had Trayvon best interest at heart.

zim didn't get off because of a weak prosectuion (although they were weak)

You're implying that the jury had pre-determined decision in mind which isn't true. The initial vote was

Two for acquittal

Two for the manslaughter beef

Two for the Murder 2

Now if the prosecution had argued the correct points, such as the angle of the gun, how does getting you ass whooped in a fight justified being killed and how excessive the act was. The outcome would have probably been different. You don't give people the opportunity the give into their predjuices and biases.

[/quote]

How can you stop someone from using their personal thoughts/opinions/beliefs/prejudices? You can't. No matter how many times you say disregard or how many times the topic is stricken from the record. Those chicks were scared at the end of the day and it played into their final decision.

The people claiming the overcharge stuff are the same people that said the crime fit manslaughter and would have been a slam dunk case. Well they had the option to charge him with manslaughter and didn't.

Again, the statements from B37 tells it all. Listen to her interview

The initial vote was

1 2nd degree murder

2 manslaughter

3 not guilty

 

[gorilla]

I had my facts wrong. Trayvon's body wasn't found 40 feet from the car, it was found 40 feet from where Zimmerman claims the altercation happened. Here is a map of where Zimmerman claims it happened and where Trayvon's body was found.http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023274981

That map shows he got out of his car and walked a long ways and got behind in between what looks like an apartment complex. He said he was looking for a street address. This appears to be the back way Jeantel mentioned Trayvon was traveling. It looks like he went directly to the area where he saw Trayvon run so that he could give an address as to where Trayvon was. We know he was following him up to this point. He says he turned around after dispatch told him to, and claimed that's when Trayvon attacked him.

Right. Again this is the shit these women totally ignored when the prosecution brought it up, not that they did some outstanding job. Zim lied time and time again so how can they turn around give credibility to his self defense claim?