Zimmerman accuser recants

[MP]

Accuser recants.  What a surprise.  It was all over the news when she said he had a gun.  Now that she says he did NOT have a gun, and it never happened.........SILENCE!

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/us-news/item/563656-zimmerman-accuser-recants


He will be a target for the rest of his life.  Real easy to say "he pointed a gun at me" and have cops believe it.

Another false accusation.

MP

[Jess Tolbirt]

sounds like a good case for a slander or liable suit..

[ptgb]

Do you know how many Domestic Violence victims come to court and "recant" their statements? Or more so, they don't officially "recant" their statements, but come to court and say they don't want anything to happen to their husband/boyfriend/lover/etc.

Just cause they say it didn't really happen doesn't mean that it actually didn't happen. I see this probably 80% of cases, over the last 20 years.

Ain't love grand?

[musclehead]

he said/she said 

without unbiased witnesses who knows....

[Patrick]

Do you know how many Domestic Violence victims come to court and "recant" their statements? Or more so, they don't officially "recant" their statements, but come to court and say they don't want anything to happen to their husband/boyfriend/lover/etc.

Just cause they say it didn't really happen doesn't mean that it actually didn't happen. I see this probably 80% of cases, over the last 20 years.

Ain't love grand?

True, but, how does anyone know that it really didn't happen in this case ? Until I find out differently, I'm willingly to go along with your 20% this time.

[The Anvil]

Do you know how many Domestic Violence victims come to court and "recant" their statements? Or more so, they don't officially "recant" their statements, but come to court and say they don't want anything to happen to their husband/boyfriend/lover/etc.

Just cause they say it didn't really happen doesn't mean that it actually didn't happen. I see this probably 80% of cases, over the last 20 years.

Ain't love grand?

I agree however, going by her statements she's clearly out of her mind. A real indicator will be whether or not he takes back up with her.

[Jess from VA]

Do you know how many Domestic Violence victims come to court and "recant" their statements? Or more so, they don't officially "recant" their statements, but come to court and say they don't want anything to happen to their husband/boyfriend/lover/etc.

Just cause they say it didn't really happen doesn't mean that it actually didn't happen. I see this probably 80% of cases, over the last 20 years.

Ain't love grand?

It was the same story in my first couple years of private practice in early 80s Pete.  Wife comes in all beat up (some worse than any fighter in the ring I ever saw, broken noses, jaws, missing eyes) and and wants a divorce.  I would prepare the paperwork and offer to help her file criminal charges of assault (I knew most of the local prosecutors) (and filing for a protective order in the divorce was/is a waste of time and money).  And for a simple no property (to speak of), and no child custody issue, I charged $150 and a $30 filing fee.  When everything was ready to sign and file, they would come in looking a little better and say they changed their mind, he really loved her and was very sorry, and she loved him, so forget about it.  A few were back in a few weeks or months.  For the most part, desperately poor young women with no family support and nowhere to go.... esp with a baby or two.  That, and doing hundreds of state paid criminal assignments was the principle reason I left private practice for the USAF JAG.  

I don't care how tough you think you are, sitting thru those interviews day after day tears you down.   And urban police work with these same gems of humanity can only be worse.

[Willow]

Oh, that's just great!    When the story was posted before we had to endure a seemingly endless stearm of "I told you so" and "that was predictable" and "Zimmerman is ... an I knew it."  Now were going to have to wade through all the posts of those folks taking their rediculous assumptions back.   

I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."

I trust our news companies so much. (I was just showing you what it looks like when someone lies.   )

[John Schmidt]

You have to know a bit more of the background of both and I'm not prone do it here. Sorta reminds me of the old saying; they met each other in the bargain basement and they both got screwed.  

[Michael K (Az.)]

Read it on H.P. Saw it on Thomas Roberts.

[The Anvil]

Oh, that's just great!    When the story was posted before we had to endure a seemingly endless stearm of "I told you so" and "that was predictable" and "Zimmerman is ... an I knew it."  Now were going to have to wade through all the posts of those folks taking their rediculous assumptions back.   

I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."

I trust our news companies so much. (I was just showing you what it looks like when someone lies.   )

Not from me. I'm more inclined to believe the initial report for the reasons already stated.

[Hooter]

Do you know how many Domestic Violence victims come to court and "recant" their statements? Or more so, they don't officially "recant" their statements, but come to court and say they don't want anything to happen to their husband/boyfriend/lover/etc.

Just cause they say it didn't really happen doesn't mean that it actually didn't happen. I see this probably 80% of cases, over the last 20 years.

Ain't love grand?

More don't make it to court than do. Case is usually dropped after the complaint is filed. Just like PPOs, not worth the paper they are written on after about a week.

[.]

Oh, that's just great!    When the story was posted before we had to endure a seemingly endless stearm of "I told you so" and "that was predictable" and "Zimmerman is ... an I knew it."  Now were going to have to wade through all the posts of those folks taking their rediculous assumptions back.   

I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."

I trust our news companies so much. (I was just showing you what it looks like when someone lies.   )

I suspect that, sooner or later, the whole Zimmerman saga is going to come to a bad end. Whether because he is truly a bad actor and will eventually bring hell down on himself or because he wound up in the bullseye and will never break free of it will probably always be a topic of debate. But, just like the original case that put him in the public eye, what will constitute an entertaining diversion for most people will be a sad tragedy for a few.

But, the statement; "I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."" strikes me as being little different than statements I've seen on this forum to the effect of; "You might disprove the story I told but it still proves a point."

It seems that conservatives and liberals may differ widely on political issues but our thought patterns are pretty well identical in how we all draw our conclusions. And that is why I generally go back to a statement I made a long time ago on one thread or another that I think generally proves itself to be accurate regardless of what side of the fence one plants his or her feet:
We can't all be right but we can all be wrong.

[The Anvil]

I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."

Nobody actually said that, but see here's the thing; was she lying then or is she lying now? Or is neither story really the truth?

Obviously she lied about something but consistent with most DV cases, she's more likely lying NOW.

[Moonshot_1]

Oh, that's just great!    When the story was posted before we had to endure a seemingly endless stearm of "I told you so" and "that was predictable" and "Zimmerman is ... an I knew it."  Now were going to have to wade through all the posts of those folks taking their rediculous assumptions back.   

I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."

I trust our news companies so much. (I was just showing you what it looks like when someone lies.   )

I suspect that, sooner or later, the whole Zimmerman saga is going to come to a bad end. Whether because he is truly a bad actor and will eventually bring hell down on himself or because he wound up in the bullseye and will never break free of it will probably always be a topic of debate. But, just like the original case that put him in the public eye, what will constitute an entertaining diversion for most people will be a sad tragedy for a few.

But, the statement; "I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."" strikes me as being little different than statements I've seen on this forum to the effect of; "You might disprove the story I told but it still proves a point."

It seems that conservatives and liberals may differ widely on political issues but our thought patterns are pretty well identical in how we all draw our conclusions. And that is why I generally go back to a statement I made a long time ago on one thread or another that I think generally proves itself to be accurate regardless of what side of the fence one plants his or her feet:
We can't all be right but we can all be wrong.

We'd all be right if you all agreed with me. How hard can it be?

[musclehead]

Oh, that's just great!    When the story was posted before we had to endure a seemingly endless stearm of "I told you so" and "that was predictable" and "Zimmerman is ... an I knew it."  Now were going to have to wade through all the posts of those folks taking their rediculous assumptions back.   

I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."

I trust our news companies so much. (I was just showing you what it looks like when someone lies.   )

I suspect that, sooner or later, the whole Zimmerman saga is going to come to a bad end. Whether because he is truly a bad actor and will eventually bring hell down on himself or because he wound up in the bullseye and will never break free of it will probably always be a topic of debate. But, just like the original case that put him in the public eye, what will constitute an entertaining diversion for most people will be a sad tragedy for a few.

But, the statement; "I'm particularly impressed by the ones that have said, "I know she said she lied but I'm going to choose to believe her anyway."" strikes me as being little different than statements I've seen on this forum to the effect of; "You might disprove the story I told but it still proves a point."

It seems that conservatives and liberals may differ widely on political issues but our thought patterns are pretty well identical in how we all draw our conclusions. And that is why I generally go back to a statement I made a long time ago on one thread or another that I think generally proves itself to be accurate regardless of what side of the fence one plants his or her feet:
We can't all be right but we can all be wrong.

I would have thought he would be in hiding for the rest of his life, seeking anonimity that he'll never be able to get.

I also woulld have thought he would have had an attempt on his life by now as much as he was threatened and he has no private security that I've heard of.

[Jess from VA]

Those that would threaten Mr Z are all blow and no show.  They do not work, so why would they go out of their way to hunt him down?  If they even had any manhunting skills beyond cowardly punches to unsuspecting pedestrians.

[Patrick]

Those that would threaten Mr Z are all blow and no show.  They do not work, so why would they go out of their way to hunt him down?  If they even had any manhunting skills beyond cowardly punches to unsuspecting pedestrians.

Ah, Oh. Hehe.

[3fan4life]

The press is out to "GET" Zimmerman by "Any Means Necessary".

The only way that he'll ever see any peace is to become a citizen of another country.

If I were him, I would have headed south of the border a long time ago.

[.]

The press is out to "GET" Zimmerman by "Any Means Necessary".

The only way that he'll ever see any peace is to become a citizen of another country.

If I were him, I would have headed south of the border a long time ago.

I spent quite a few years as a newspaper reporter and editor so it causes me to do a double take whenever someone refers to "The Press" or "The Media" as though either is a single organism with many outlets all working in sync to do the bidding of a central authority. There are literally thousands of news organizations in this country that range from one guy (or girl) trying to cover all local news stories of interest at a tiny newspaper, radio station, or television broadcaster (or online news site) to the huge media corporations that actually do suck up virtually everything they can get their hands on that will serve the interest of the home office.

In between those two extremes are many organizations of varying size and audience that define their own scope of interests to serve. Some do it well, some do it not so well, and generally whether they do their jobs well or not depends on the opinion of the audience they serve.

Mr. Zimmerman, for good or ill, has captured the interest of a large segment of the public and as such, will find his name in the news pretty much anytime he does anything that raises his profile enough to be noticed. Of course, if he didn't make it into the news, there is a whole segment of the news watching public that would be beating the drums saying "The Media" is covering up his misdeeds. I suppose it is all a "vast, right wing conspiracy" being driven by the "liberal media elite." Or something like that.

When I went into the news business I did it because I wanted to report the news, not because I wanted to be appreciated by everyone. When I began craving appreciation I went to work for "The Government." 

[musclehead]

The press is out to "GET" Zimmerman by "Any Means Necessary".

The only way that he'll ever see any peace is to become a citizen of another country.

If I were him, I would have headed south of the border a long time ago.

I spent quite a few years as a newspaper reporter and editor so it causes me to do a double take whenever someone refers to "The Press" or "The Media" as though either is a single organism with many outlets all working in sync to do the bidding of a central authority. There are literally thousands of news organizations in this country that range from one guy (or girl) trying to cover all local news stories of interest at a tiny newspaper, radio station, or television broadcaster (or online news site) to the huge media corporations that actually do suck up virtually everything they can get their hands on that will serve the interest of the home office.

In between those two extremes are many organizations of varying size and audience that define their own scope of interests to serve. Some do it well, some do it not so well, and generally whether they do their jobs well or not depends on the opinion of the audience they serve.

Mr. Zimmerman, for good or ill, has captured the interest of a large segment of the public and as such, will find his name in the news pretty much anytime he does anything that raises his profile enough to be noticed. Of course, if he didn't make it into the news, there is a whole segment of the news watching public that would be beating the drums saying "The Media" is covering up his misdeeds. I suppose it is all a "vast, right wing conspiracy" being driven by the "liberal media elite." Or something like that.

When I went into the news business I did it because I wanted to report the news, not because I wanted to be appreciated by everyone. When I began craving appreciation I went to work for "The Government." 

maybe it should be written the "media" of a certian "ilk"" or "bias" is out to get him.

"Z" could literally save 25 orphans from a burning orphanage and these types would try to paint him  as an arsonist. 

[mdouglas71]

How convenient for zimmerman. I thought he was previously married though before all of this..

[MP]

Not sure if I would call being falsely accused of weapon brandishing, and spending time in jail wrongly, as convenient.  He is divorced.

[Patrick]

He was divorced just before or during the trail. I don't believe there were any DV issues in that marriage, were there ?

[vranasaurus]

Not sure if I would call being falsely accused of weapon brandishing, and spending time in jail wrongly, as convenient.  He is divorced.

I wouldn't say he was falsely accused.  Quite frankly this case could have still been prosecuted based upon her earlier statements.  Here is Kansas once a witness testifies any out of court statements they made become admissible for the truth of the matter asserted.  After the victim testifies I just call the officer to the stand to recount what the victim said, play the 911 tape, play the officer's audio recording, or all three.  If anyone was just out to get him they would have gone full bore on him.  Subpoenaed the victim and when she didn't show getting a material witness warrant for her.  More than likely the prosecutor just didn't want to put a bunch of work into it and has a substantial case load that could use the attention.

I have prosecuted and convicted people of DV offenses despite the victims vehement objections from the witness stand.  I have even prosecuted three people where the victim didn't show.  One guy gave a full confession and even demonstrated for the police, in another the officer pulled up and saw her hitting him, and in the third the victim had recorded a him hitting her on her cell phone and I had an independent witness to authenticate the video.

Until you spend some time working with DV cases you don't really understand the odd dynamics and problems  associated with them.  Having been yelled at by a DV victim, for not dismissing the case,  I can tell you that strange things occur in DV court.