The police told Zimmerman to stay in the car. Why did he get out?

The People are the authority or the Police?

Everyone knows the police have authority issues, but somehow fail to understand neighborhood watch can have those same issues, but only when it hurts their argument...........
 
Anti-Party said:
So you are stating that stalking someone is different than "staying in a car" or.........
Click to expand...

What are you trying to say? I listened to the you tube audio that you provided. Nothing different than what I've heard before. The question is....what happened after they hung up. Judging from the cell phone witness of Martin's....I'd say he went looking for him. But the fact remains that the dispatcher never told him to "stay in the car".

Look...I think that Zimmerman is very culpable in what happened that night. In fact, I think his actions were reckless, irresponsible and led to the death of Martin....but I'm not going to make stuff up.
 
First, the police didn't tell him anything. A dispatcher is not a law enforcement officer and nothing he says is legally binding.

Secondly, he multiple times asked zimmerman questions to the effect of "where is he going, what is he doing now", "Can you see him?", "Now where did he go?" The only way you can answer these questions is by following someone. It's essentially implied.

Third, the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" AFTER he had already gotten out of the car. This statement is obviously very non-committal, and that is actually done on purpose. You see, the city/dispatchers can be sued for giving direct orders if shit hits the fan. So they try to keep their statements as neutral as possible. Guess what happens when you make neutral statements?

Finally, when sean noffke (the dispatcher) got on the stand, he admitted in cross that he could understand why zimmerman might have interpreted his questions and comments in a different manner.

IN FACT, sean noffke even admitted he had no cause for concern that zimmerman was out of the car. How 'bout that???

--

Here are key parts of the dispatchers transcript taken from the trial, which can be found in my super serial Zimmerman thread in APP:

Sean Noffke - 911 Dispatcher


Cross examination (paraphrased):

Defense: Cause for concern over zimmerman asking if trayvon is black?


Sean: no


cause for concern over the caller?


no


Any Anger, any animosity?


no


What did you take to mean he's a black male? Cause for concern?


No


Re: zimmerman getting out of the car after being asked twice to trayvons whereabouts:


"I can see why he may have interpreted "which way he is running" other than what I intended"


Cause for concern zimmerman is out of the car after these events?


no.


Any concern he doesn't want to give out his address when trayvon might be around?


no


Any concern that he wants to meet at the mailboxes?


No


Is cursing something you hear on many of the calls you take on?


Yes


Any concern about saying "these assholes they always get away?"


no.


None whatsoever?


no sir.

* * * * *

More misinformation easily shot down by me barely even trying. I'll be here all day folks.
 
Last edited:
The dispatcher never asked "where is he going" "can you see him" or "now where did he go." Will you be able to figure out the proper use of quotes sometime today or ever?

Zimmerman was asked to report what Trayvon was doing during the moments that Zimmerman indicated he was approaching him and had something in his hands. Obviously, the dispatcher was concerned for Zimmerman's immediate safety during those moments. After Zimmerman reported he had fled those concerns vanished. The dispatcher asked in which direction Trayvon ran. The dispatcher made it clear that he was not asking Zimmerman to follow and George continued to do what he was doing. He did not stop and return to his vehicle. The only change was to his story about why he left his car.
 
Professor Baxter said:
The dispatcher never asked "where is he going" "can you see him" or "now where did he go." Will you be able to figure out the proper use of quotes sometime today or ever?
Click to expand...

I said "questions to the effect." That was a paraphrase. We can't do this type of dialogue exchange if I have to type sentences over trivial stuff like this to address these things.
 
TeamZ said:
I said "questions to the effect." That was a paraphrase. We can't do this type of dialogue exchange if I have to type sentences over trivial stuff like this to address these things.
Click to expand...

Okay, but the dispatcher did not ask questions to that effect. It happened exactly as I stated.
 
TeamZ said:
First, the police didn't tell him anything. A dispatcher is not a law enforcement officer and nothing he says is legally binding.

Secondly, he multiple times asked zimmerman questions to the effect of "where is he going, what is he doing now", "Can you see him?", "Now where did he go?" The only way you can answer these questions is by following someone. It's essentially implied.

Third, the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" AFTER he had already gotten out of the car. This statement is obviously very non-committal, and that is actually done on purpose. You see, the city/dispatchers can be sued for giving direct orders if shit hits the fan. So they try to keep their statements as neutral as possible. Guess what happens when you make neutral statements?

Finally, when sean noffke (the dispatcher) got on the stand, he admitted in cross that he could understand why zimmerman might have interpreted his questions and comments in a different manner.

IN FACT, sean noffke even admitted he had no cause for concern that zimmerman was out of the car. How 'bout that???

--

Here are key parts of the dispatchers transcript taken from the trial, which can be found in my super serial Zimmerman thread in APP:

Sean Noffke - 911 Dispatcher


Cross examination (paraphrased):

Defense: Cause for concern over zimmerman asking if trayvon is black?


Sean: no


cause for concern over the caller?


no


Any Anger, any animosity?


no


What did you take to mean he's a black male? Cause for concern?


No


Re: zimmerman getting out of the car after being asked twice to trayvons whereabouts:


"I can see why he may have interpreted "which way he is running" other than what I intended"


Cause for concern zimmerman is out of the car after these events?


no.


Any concern he doesn't want to give out his address when trayvon might be around?


no


Any concern that he wants to meet at the mailboxes?


No


Is cursing something you hear on many of the calls you take on?


Yes


Any concern about saying "these assholes they always get away?"


no.


None whatsoever?


no sir.

* * * * *

More misinformation easily shot down by me barely even trying. I'll be here all day folks.
Click to expand...

Your exactly right the dispatcher is no more a cop than Trayvon or Zimmerman was , it was a suggestion at best
 
Anti-Party said:
The police told Zimmerman to stay in the car. Why did he get out?
Click to expand...

It is always difficult debating with someone who starts off with a faulty premise, but I will try.

First Zimmerman was not speaking with the Police. He was speaking with a dispatcher. That is not the same thing. Dispatchers have no authority of law. You are not legally bound to do what they tell you.

Second, he was asked by the dispatcher where Trayvon was going. That is when he got out of his truck.

Third, the dispatcher said "You don't need to do that"

Fourth, after the dispatcher said "You don't need to do that", Zimmerman said "OK"

Fifth, when questioned on the stand, the dispatcher said it was reasonable for Zimmerman to do what he did based on the questions Zimmerman was asked.

Sixth, Zimmerman is an hispanic

Seventh, Zimmerman is a registered democrat

Eighth, Zimmerman voted for Obama

Have a blessed day
 
Zimmerman said during his reenactment with the police that he got out of his vehicle to locate a street sign to verify where exactly he was. There was no testimony in court that disputed that by anybody. Zimmerman said he was attacked by Martin and there was no testimony in court to dispute that.

The verdict was a great day for gun rights and selfe-defense!!!!!
 
Steelplate said:
I didn't hear that on the 911 recording....I heard "Yeah, we don't need you to do that".

Just being honest....
Click to expand...


he had been at meeting where they instruct people NOT to follow just observe and report.

He knew that they instruct people NOT TO FOLLOW
 
Classic Liberal said:
Zimmerman said during his reenactment with the police that he got out of his vehicle to locate a street sign to verify where exactly he was. There was no testimony in court that disputed that by anybody. Zimmerman said he was attacked by Martin and there was no testimony in court to dispute that.

The verdict was a great day for gun rights and selfe-defense!!!!!
Click to expand...


how long had he lived there?


there were three small streets in the complex that he "PATROLLED" all the time
 
I Love America said:
It is always difficult debating with someone who starts off with a faulty premise, but I will try.

First Zimmerman was not speaking with the Police. He was speaking with a dispatcher. That is not the same thing. Dispatchers have no authority of law. You are not legally bound to do what they tell you.

Second, he was asked by the dispatcher where Trayvon was going. That is when he got out of his truck.

Third, the dispatcher said "You don't need to do that"

Fourth, after the dispatcher said "You don't need to do that", Zimmerman said "OK"

Fifth, when questioned on the stand, the dispatcher said it was reasonable for Zimmerman to do what he did based on the questions Zimmerman was asked.

Sixth, Zimmerman is an hispanic

Seventh, Zimmerman is a registered democrat

Eighth, Zimmerman voted for Obama

Have a blessed day
Click to expand...


please provide the proof of all those statements
 
Classic Liberal said:
Zimmerman said during his reenactment with the police that he got out of his vehicle to locate a street sign to verify where exactly he was. There was no testimony in court that disputed that by anybody. Zimmerman said he was attacked by Martin and there was no testimony in court to dispute that.

The verdict was a great day for gun rights and selfe-defense!!!!!
Click to expand...

That's not true. The evidence of the dispatcher's call disputed that as well as the Hannity interview and the walk through. Zimmerman changed his story.
 
Professor Baxter said:
That's not true. The evidence of the dispatcher's call disputed that as well as the Hannity interview and the walk through. Zimmerman changed his story.
Click to expand...


I love thanking your posts.

Its great to know not all right leaning people are blind racists.


you rock
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top