The Orlando Sentinel has apparently answered the question of whose voice was heard screaming for help in the Trayvon Martin shooting.
In a timeline included in evidence documents released last week, Sanford police spelled out down to the second, what happened the night George Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon Martin, based on time-stamped calls to their dispatch center.
It shows Zimmerman fired 1 minute, 57 seconds after he hung up.
*1911:12 – Call received from George Zimmerman reporting suspicious person
1913:19 – Zimmerman relays that suspicious person is running from him.
1913:36 – Dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he is following suspicious person
1913:36 – Dispatcher advises Zimmerman “Okay; we don’t need you to do that”
1915:23 – Approximate time call with Zimmerman ends
1916:43 – 911 call placed by (blacked out name) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help
1917:20 – Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease
1917:40 – Officer T. Smith arrives on scene
1919:43 – Officer T. Smith locates and places Zimmerman in custody.
via Patterico
No other version ever made any sense. It’s now abundantly clear that the Angela Corey persecution prosecution is political and nothing more.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@Greg:
However one would expect the faculty and fellows of Harvard Law would have some expertise at marshaling competent evidence bearing on a legal question, no?
Here is a list of the directors: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people
Here is a list of the fellows: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/fellows
Here is a list of the faculty associates: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/faculty+associates
Yes Berkman Center is populated by heavy weighs.
And by ” Nearly all of the references cited are anti-drug organizations” you mean:
“National Clearinghouse on Alcohol and Drug Information”
The National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (NIDA), part of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), is one of the largest Federal clearinghouses, a one-stop resource for information about substance abuse prevention and addiction treatment.
The NCADI Web site is located at http://ncadi.samhsa.gov/
and
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), http://www.samhsa.gov, United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is the lead federal agency addressing substance abuse and mental health services in the U.S. Its headquarters is in Rockville, Maryland.
And New Scientist magazine which was “launched in 1956 “for all those men and women who are interested in scientific discovery, and in its industrial, commercial and social consequences” …
More authoritative however is the
clownfellow who responded with the following?“… boxes of cookies or bags of Cheetos”. Skittles too?
Your response Greg leaves you open to justified ridicule. Perhaps you would wish to withdraw your response.
.
Yes, uncontrollable aggressiveness IS a side effect of marijuana use.
U-N-C-O-N-T-R-O-L-L-A-B-L-E . . . A-G-G-R-E-S-S-I-V-E-N-E-S-S
@Mike O’Malley, #51:
Do you really think that the SAMHSA would promote any research data that discredits the U.S. government’s long standing prohibitionist position?
It seems odd to me that people who consider the EPA a socialist plot would automatically believe a bureaucratic agency that’s charged with propping up a failed $15 billion per year War on Drugs–the primary beneficiaries of which have been private, for-profit prisons and Mexican drug cartels.
It’s also odd that anyone advocating Constitution based law wouldn’t be deeply offended by the Controlled Substance Act, which empowers bureaucrats to regulate by arbitrary proclamation rather than by legislative process. This is exactly the sort of thing that small-government conservatives claim to hate.
My response was a suggestion that people inform themselves on the topic and start thinking for themselves. I would have thought conservatives would appreciate that approach.
@Greg:
Obviously you have bought into the meme that marijuana is harmless. I beg to differ. But be that as it may, I assume you support the legalization of drugs based on the left wing argument that drug laws only serve to make the drug cartels wealthy and that the government has no right to tell you what you can do with your body?
Fine, and how far do you want to take that? Do you think that all drugs should be legalized? Antibiotics, anti-depressants, etc should also be sold on the open market with no restrictions?
But here is my deal for the pro-drug legalization crowd: you’re right. I have no right to tell you what to do with your body. If you want to sell it for sex, fine. If you want to smoke, snort or inject chemicals into your body, fine. But don’t expect me to pay for that use. If you overdose, don’t expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab when your buddies take you to the hospital. If you can’t pay for your own decisions, too damn bad, you get no medical treatment to save your life. Chances are you will die, and that too, was your choice, not mine.
If you become a heavy user of pot, which generally tends to make people apathetic toward any activity, I guess you will starve to death because it is not MY responsibility to pay taxes that are redistributed to you in the form of food stamps. It is not MY responsibility to provide you with shelter, or medical care, or rehab.
The problem with you progressives (modern liberalism) is that you want all the freedom to make choices for yourself with none of the responsibilities that go along with those choices.
Retire05
“If you become a heavy user of pot, which generally tends to make people apathetic toward any activity”
Umm Umm I thought it made you “uncontrollably aggressive” according to Mike O’Malley. Obviously he has never actually smoked Marijuana or been around pot heads.
@Greg:
As usual from greg.
1) A response completely lacking in supporting info.
2) It’s all a conspiracy when facts prove his beliefs wrong.
Mike O’MALLEY
I JUST READ ON ANOTHER POST FROM Nan that 7 thousands BLACKS are murder by other BLACKS,
I tell that they are incline to explosive violence spurs, so, imagine adding drugs to that activity is definitly a bomb ready to explode anytime and for any excuses, it make them using it
like dynamite, only needed one tiny spark. as we have seen done on WHITE WHO WHERE ATTACK AFTER THE ELECTED CALL FOR INDICTMENT OF ZIMMERMAN, AND FEDERAL CIVIL ACTION TAKEN.
IT RESEMBLE STRANGELY TO THE MOB IN AFGHANISTAN,
AFTER THE BOOK WHICH THE PRISONERS WHERE USING TO RELAY MESSAGES TO OUTSIDE SYMPATHIZER WAS
UN-ENTENTIONELY BURN PARTLY.
THE BEHAVIOR IS SIMILAR.
@retire05, #53:
Did I say that somewhere? Inhaling smoke and particulates is generally not good for a person. Considering the enormous health and societal damages unquestionably resulting from tobacco and alcohol use, however, marijuana is comparatively harmless. Virtually all of the harm associated with marijuana is a direct result of its illegality.
Marijuana is the largest single cash crop in America and has been for years. Given that fact, it’s probably safe to assume that it is much more widely used than generally acknowledged. If it were as dire a menace as prohibitionists have been claiming for the past 75 years, we surely would have been seeing a tidal wave epidemic of adverse consequences for decades. Yet critics have to beat the bushes to come up with even a handful of anecdotal examples of negative consequences in any given year. Statistically, far more damage is done by the misuse of aspirin.
Rather than getting off into the weeds in a discussion regarding legalization, let’s at least stay in the Sanford, FL neighborhood shall we?
There have been multiple claims on this thread that Martin was “high” or “stoned” or “under the influence” when he was shot.
There have been claims that the THC levels in Martin’s blood indicate intoxication.
The only problem is that multiple experts have been cited to the contrary.
So, I would invite those on this thread who wish for us to believe that Martin was indeed “high” or “stoned” or “under the influence” to cite some source materials or experts which support your conclusions.
Seems to me there is a whole lot of pointless lip flapping going on in a desperate effort to lynch the black guy.
Continued use of pot can lead to paranoia. Even if one isn’t intoxicated at the time, and we know that Martin was under the influence of pot at the time of the incident, they may suffer from delusion and paranoia.
If you didn’t know about these effects, Aye, than you should educate yourself on this dangerous drug.
It’s illegal for a reason, Aye.
@Aye:
I’m confused one which “black guy” you are referring to. The black guy who was shot, or the black guy who did the shooting. We find out that Zimmerman has relative who are black, thus could you clarify why you think many of us are sticking up for “the black guy” and at the same time we supposedly want “the black guy’ shot and killed.
Typical liberal, throw down the race-card when losing the debate.
How are tiswin sales doing, Aye? Sales of Winchesters keeping up these days?
Are you getting about thirty pieces of silver for each repeater?
Ron H.
IT DEPEND ON MANY FACTS,
IF YOU ARE ALREADY A DYNAMITE STICK TYPE , IT CAN LIGHT YOU UP,
As the original post points out, the facts coming out no longer support the ”narrative” that had been touted by Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, Trayvon’s parents and their lawyer and so on.
So, what to do?
MSNBC takes the lead!
@Ivan:
But we don’t know that now do we Ivan?
You’ve claimed it over and over. Your racist/sexist pal O’Malley has claimed it over and over.
Funny thing is, neither of you has cited a single source which supports your conclusion. Not a single source in this entire back and forth discussion.
I’ve already cited two experts who disagree with your conclusions.
Is there no one who will support you two pendejos in what you’re trying to sell?
Seems that your version of the truth only exists in the shallow pool that is your intellect.
@Ivan:
The most important information is not going to come from Martin’s chest blood and urine, it will be in the toxicology report that has yet to be released. I suggest you educate yourself in why a teen with “gansta” grills and tats would be interested in Arizona Watermelon drink (it was not any of the Arizona teas as he is filmed buying a red can) and Skittles and the term “drank.” Maybe this conversation of Martin’s explains his purchases:
http://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/trayvondrugdealing-2.jpg
Also, just in case you don’t know, Aye just called you and Mike “pubic hairs.”
http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/pendejo
Pendejo is considered a real insult in Spanish circles.
@Ron H.:
And you, Ron H., obviously have never read peer reviewed medical research on the topic of the effects of using marijuana. No?
I have.
Marijuana use generally tends to make people apathetic toward any activity. It also makes them paranoid, generally. It also makes them delusional, generally. It also impairs their thinking, generally. But sometimes, not generally, but sometimes it makes them uncontrollably aggressive
Yes, uncontrollable aggressiveness IS a side effect of marijuana use.
U-N-C-O-N-T-R-O-L-L-A-B-L-E . . . A-G-G-R-E-S-S-I-V-E-N-E-S-S .
@Ron H.:
Do you need someone to explain the meaning of generally to you?
@Aye:
[Emphasis added by me, Mike]
@retire05:
From the Urban Dictionary
1. Pendejo
pendejo is a spanish slang word for idiot,stupid or dumass.
El es un pendejo.
He is a dumass.
2. Pendejo
Pendejo is a single pubic hair. In Mexico´s slang it is used as an insult like idiot or fool, but in Peru´s slang it used to describe a smart guy with few or no scruples.
No confies en el. Es un pendejo.
3. Pendejo
spanish slang, with different meanings depending on the context.
Can mean asshole, or dumbass (idiot, stupid) but much less severe than english “cuss-words.”
Can be a casual insult, depending on the context in which it is used.
It rumored to mean “anal hair” or “pubic hair” in a few spanish speaking cultures, however, it is not commonly used to mean that.
“Chupa me, pendejo!”
Thanks for pointing that out Retire05. And the dude is shocked when I don’t respond to his relentless personal abuse! He’s a smart and an articulate man but criticism often carries an element of projection. Makes you wonder sometimes what suppressed thing is eating him up inside.
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Indeed, as it was during the Crown Heights pogrom and the Freddies’ Fashion Mart mass murder, and KKK lynchings …
Ann Coulter wrote a worthy book on this behavior: Demonic
But the story goes back at least as far as Cain and Able.
Mikey and Retired:
Peer reviewed research is a tricky thing. Last i checked there is “peer reviewed” research that says man made climate change is real so does that mean you believe in climate change? Having lived in California for a number of years as well as “experimenting” with Marijuana when I was a younger man I can tell you from first hand experience that I have NEVER seen anyone act in an overly aggressive manner. Does that mean it never happens? No it doesn’t but GENERALLY speaking it is very rare. I seriously doubt that Travon acted in an aggressive manner because he had trace amounts of TCH in his system. More than likely he was afraid of this strange man that was following him. Perhaps the two of you should smoke some weed together so you can fully understand the effects of the drug. Instead of just talking out of your asses. Oh and the two of you can take your condescension and shove it……..
@Ron H.: You reminded me about my three late niece/nephews, RonH.
They were brothers and sister from a previous marriage when my middle brother married their mom.
As they hit teen years they became full-blown pot heads.
Aggression was their FIRST defense to any challenge.
Whether it was their step-dad” suggesting they get jobs, stay in school or pay their own way – aggression was their first response.
They keyed all of his cars because he refused to allow them to drive unless they paid for gas.
One night one of them took a hammer to a car he was not being allowed to drive.
When my mom used to visit their home she would lock her purse in the trunk of her car.
When they found out that’s where she kept her money one or more of them tore up all of the things she had given my brother after our dad died.
All three of them died in their 20’s and 30’s.
One got full-blown AIDS because he prostituted himself for money to stay high.
One did suicide-by-cop pretended to have a gun after a short chase in a ”borrowed” car that he had used to buy a kilo of pot.
The girl died in a prison fight after being convicted of identity theft.
I note here that none of them went out and fought either their step-dad, their mom or my mom.
All their aggressions were against things that could not fight back.
But the implicit threat that, “next time this windshield could be your head,” was always there.
@Ron H.:
Obviously your first mistake was living in California.
Now, since I never saw a benefit in either marijuana or alcohol, or doing harder drugs, why should I “experiment” with pot now? What purpose does it serve other than create a mind altering state ranging from euphoria to aggression? Personally, I find people who have to depend on chemicals injected into their body to cope with everyday life pretty much losers.
Trayvon was not some angelic young boy. He had a “gansta” grill, along with a number of tats. And while some may think that the grill was cheap (under $200) that poses even more questions. Where does a young man, barely over 17, get the money for grills and tats? If he was getting that money from his mom, what does that say about a mother who is responsible for a minor?
I’m not defending Travon as I think more than likely he did initiate the attack on Zimmerman although I would argue out of fear, but regardless I think it is ridiculous to say that “the weed” caused the aggression. Had he been drunk I would have said more than likely as there are numerous examples of intoxicated people being aggressive. My whole point was that people who have never tried drugs are usually the ones who seem to have the most misinformed opinions about the actual effects of drugs. Nan G. I find your story incredibly hard to believe as Marijuana is not very addictive when compared to alcohol, nicotine, cocaine etc. More then likely your niece and nephews were either addicted to something else (meth, cocaine, etc) or they were just bad kids who were into bad things. I have never, ever heard of someone prostituting themselves out for pot. Cocaine, Meth, heroin yes but pot? I’m sorry but I just don’t believe you. It sounds to ridiculous. That’s would be as ridiculous as me saying I knew a guy who prostituted himself out to by cigarettes which are ten times more addictive than Marijuana. Every “pot head” I have ever known, and in California there are a lot of them, were incredibly docile and non violent so again your niece and nephews were just bad kids who couldn’t stay out of trouble.
@Ron H.:
Sure, but peer reviewed scientific literature ordinarily is substantially more reliable than uncorroborated first hand anecdotal testimony and in turn far far more reliable than uncorroborated first hand anecdotal testimony of experienced stoners. As I’m confident you will agree.
We can agree that it is a less common side effect.
Can we agree however that paranoia is a common side effect of marijuana use? Can we agree that impaired judgment is a common side effect of marijuana use? Can we agree that anxiety is a common side effect of marijuana use? Because they are common side effects of marijuana use.
You are entitled to you opinion, but as the adage goes, not to your own facts. Trayvon Martin had measurable amounts of TCH in his blood. That meant Trayvon Martin had smoked marijuana in the previous one, two or three hours before the shooting. Trayvon Martin was under the influence. The source of the qualifying adjective”trace” amounts is the Martin/Fulton clan. It is self serving family spin.
Among the common side effects of marijuana use are: anxiety and paranoia. So it seems likely that Trayvon Martin was afraid of Mr. Zimmerman, particularly as Trayvon Martin circled Mr. Zimmerman in his vehicle at close range and observed Mr. Zimmerman speaking on his cellphone to the 911 police operator.
Spoken like an experienced stoner?
Your resentment is noted Ron H. I expect that Trayvon Martin resented Mr. Zimmerman for calling the 911 police operator on him too. I guess that Trayvon Martin did not choose to call his father for help or even to call the 911 police operator himself because he was stoned and the arrival of dad and/or the cops on the scene would not work out so well for him as he was stoned. Remember Trayvon Martin had been sent to stay with his dad because of his earlier drug use. Can you just imagine how you would have resented Mr. Zimmerman if you were caught in a similar situation?
@Nan G:
The role of a good stepfather goes largely unrecognized and unappreciated. They often are dedicated to providing for their new family and teenage step children normally focus their resentment and aggression upon that substitute frontline moral authority, their stepfather.
I hope your brother’s wife paid him back with a lifetime of devotion and love.
@Mike O’Malley, #73:
It’s the prohibitionists who rely heavily on anecdotal testimony. They’re the ones to choose to totally ignore the statistical evidence that marijuana is relatively harmless with few negative social consequences, and the growing volumes of legitimate research from well-respected institutions.
Consider this, for instance: Moderate Marijuana Use Does Not Impair Lung Function, Study Finds
That one was recently published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, and financed by the National Institutes of Health. How much more reputable do you want?
You would probably like to use The Demon Weed as evidence. (Bits from an actual vintage “educational” film, believe it or not, with humorous alterations. I think it’s hilarious and I haven’t even been smoking anything. The first narrator sounds like Ed Wood. For the real deal, uncut and unedited, there’s always Reefer Madness. )
@Greg:
I’m sorry Greg. It seems best to decline engaging you on this tangent. It seems a red herring to me.
Your citation regarding impairment of lung function is irrelevant to our discussion and your resort that stale stoner trope about “The Demon Weed” is but a much over used cliche.
If suggesting that a trace level of THC metabolites in Martin’s blood might mean that he was “stoned out of his mind”, paranoid, or irrationally aggressive isn’t a red herring, I don’t know what is. But I will leave the thread. I am going off on a tangent.
@Greg:
Now that is an example of a straw man argument.
I never said that “trace level of THC metabolites in Martin’s blood might mean that he was “stoned out of his mind”.
You need to read what I write with more care. I addressed THC metabolites, but I focused on THC itself. THC is normally metabolized out of the blood in less than four hours after use. Therefore since measurable amounts of THC were found in his blood we must conclude that Trayvon Martin used a THC based illegal drug on, two or three hours before his encounter with Mr. Zimmerman.
At #73 I wrote:
I also wrote:
A straw man is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position
The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:
1) Person A has position X.
2) Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. The position Y is a distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:
a) Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent’s position.
b) Quoting an opponent’s words out of context — i.e. choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent’s actual intentions (see fallacy of quoting out of context).
c) Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person’s arguments — thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.
d) Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
e) Oversimplifying an opponent’s argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.
3) Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.
GREG
YOU MENTIONED THE DRUG DOESN’T AFFECT THE LUNGS,?
OKAY, BUT IT AFFECT THE BRAIN FOR A LIFE TIME,
IF YOU OBSERVE THE BEHAVIOR OF ONE WHO TAKE IT,
THEY DEMONSTRATE A COMPULSIVE WAY OF BEHAVING,
THAT IS NOT THE SAME AS A SANE PERSON,
THERE LIES THE PROBLEMATIC OF THEIR ACTIONS BECOMING MORE EXTENSIVES THAN THE OTHER NON DRUG USERS, THE REACTION TO EVENT IS UNPREDICTABLE ALSO, DEPENDING ON THEIR CORE VALUES MORE OR LESS WHICH THEY ADAPT TO THE PRIMARY ONES AS PRIMATE REACTIONS
WHICH ONCE STARTED BECOME TO A POINT OF NON STOP UNTIL EXAUSTION OR FORCE UPON THEM,