No he is right! I heard that same audio and the dispatcher did tell him not to follow. I do remember that detail vividly.
1 Like
It was a female phone handling
1 Like
The first question is, what is the source of your reference here? Please list it!
First, they dispatcher has ZERO authority to tell anyone to do anything. Second he was NOT told not to follow TM, read it more carefully.
It says in the transcript that he was told not follow! This was correct as I also heard the audio! Not sure what you are trying to argue here as it’s plain as day in the original transcript I just posted!
1 Like
“We don’t need you to do that.” is not a direct order to do or not do something. Is it?
Again, a 911 dispatcher has zero authority to give orders.
Can we agree it is a suggestion?
Ok so you are basing your argument on semantics now! If I told you the sky was blue you can argue that it’s grey! That is basically what you are presenting in this context!
1 Like
No, the foundation of the initial outrage was the dispatcher’s statement which was meaningless in the context of the incident. Semantics matter here.
No it does not and you arguing it that it is, is irrelevant! It came down to personal choices that both Zimmerman and Martin made that night! He was told not to follow and decided not to heed the dispatchers request! This was all Rick was saying, as he wasn’t making a contrary or contested argument on this subject matter!
1 Like
Which GZ was not required to obey. It isn’t rocket science.
Of course GZ surveiled TM. It was his voluntary job as a neighborhood watchman to monitor suspicious activity in light of the frequent burglaries in the community. TM made the fatal choice to attack GZ instead of returning home.
Dude you trying to argue this along the lines of semantics is the equivalent of performing mental gymnastics to prove that you are right, which is a pointless endeavour.
1 Like
Who was not a cop, had absolutely no police authority and only said, “we don’t need you to do that”.
No, “We don’t need you to do that” by someone with no authority at all to tell him what to do is not “he was told by a cop not to follow”.
Rick did not mention anything about a cop! Hence his phrase “female handling”! Regardless that was not at all what my point was in this context the authority part of this equation is irrelevant.
1 Like
It’s not semantics by any stretch, he wasn’t given anything resembling a lawful order by an LEO not to follow.
dispatcher:
Okay, we don’t need you to do that. [2:26]
Not a cop, not an order and no obligation to follow the suggestion.
You’re a lawyer, you know that makes all the difference in the world.
The original claim we all responded to is that he was ordered by police not to follow, that is factually false.