Oh, and DHS grant money has to be used for, guess what, Homeland Security specific equipment and personnel.

In case you missed on the previous page Tolstoy, I want to know why if there is so much money floating around, many city police departments are having to layoff police officers to balance their budgets. Cities much biogger and richer than Sanford like Cincinnati, OH.

"DHS grant money has to be used for, guess what, Homeland Security specific equipment and personnel."

Are you telling me a cell phone cracker wouldn't be classified as "Homeland Security specific equipment"? Don't you know the 9/11 terrorists used cell phones?!?!?

"I want to know why if there is so much money floating around, many city police departments are having to layoff police officers to balance their budgets."

I can't speak to your local situation without seeing the financials, but if it's anything like SoCal, the talk of laying off officers and letting the murderers and child rapists out of prison is all hype to justify higher taxes. Police officers in my city make on average more than $100k/year with fantastic benefits. There is no serious talk of cutting their pay or pensions, only of raising new taxes to pay them - the public is largely oblivious to the truth of the situation. Wouldn't surprise me if there was a similar situation where you are (but I wouldn't take your brother's word for it if I were you).

Well, Cincinnati actually did the layoffs. The city is hurting and cut the Sheriff's budget severely. And my brother is now unemployed. So, yeah, they did the layoffs last year. It wasn't a toothless threat. They had to do it to be within Cincinnati's budget. Of course, Cincinnati has a joke of a city council and is almost bankrupt because they can't get their acts together. They'll spend millions on building a new streetcar that runs the same route as the Metro busses already run, but can't afford to give the money needed to keep a proper police force to the Sheriff. Go figure.

"ABC news reported on the girlfriends call on March 19 when the girl gave the info to Martin's family"

So let me get this straight, Santa. The girlfriend /doesn't/ tell the family for nearly a month because .... why? If I was on the phone with a good kid and he said he was being followed, I heard the sound of fighting, etc, I'd be calling nearby family and probably the police. If I didn't have the numbers for the family, I'd be finding out from the school when I saw that my friend wasn't there the next day. E-Mac has made a good point here. Why did the girl wait to tell /the family/?

A defense attorney would have a field day with her testimony.

Trying the case in the media is exactly what doesn't serve any purpose. Any defendant deserves a jury pool that isn't tainted. Not only does the media print stories about Zimmerman now Trayvon's character is smeared. Selling ads in media publications over the death tragic death of a youth is one of the slimier aspects of free press in American society.

She needed to memorize the details of her story so the cops couldn't trip her up on them.

1.) it is not speculation she was on the phone with him, SHE WAS on the phone with him. The phone records shows he was. And by all account she was traumatized by this and even spent a night n the hospital as a result.

2.) Sure, perhaps the defense attorney will have a field day. Does that in ANY WAY have anything to do with the Police failing to to recognize and contact a person who was on the phone with a victim at the time of the killing? Does the fact that you see it as uncredible have anything to do with that I was talking about?

I never disputed E-mac's point, I disputed E-macs reading comprehension. I find her testimony suspicious as well until more information is given. What I do dispute vehemently is that a police investigation can be called thorough when the police didn't even check the phone records of a murdered 17 year old.

You two are trying to drag me into an argument I havn't made, great be Perry Mason, just don't cast me as the prosecutor for christ sake.

There is plenty off fault lying with zimmerman whether or not this 16 year old girl heard what she heard.

Draug, they have the machines, they use them, and even if they don't have them, they have computer programs that can do the same thing. I can't believe we are arguing that a passworded phone, or in E-macs estimation, a powered down phone, is a impassible roadblock for an investigation.

again Emac, this case wouldn't exist if the media didn't get involved. You have not brought up one piece of evidence to dispute this.

and finally this notion that someone can even be tried and convicted in the media. OJ was "Tried in the media" and he was acquitted, Case Anthony was "tried in the media" and she was let off with a slsp on the wrist. The justice system has ways of countering media frenzies. This case shows there isn't much besides a media frenzy that can counter a police squad that doesn't give a crap.

"she was traumatized by this and even spent a night n the hospital as a result."

Okay, okay, let me try again. She heard scuffles then the phone went dead, so she hyperventilates(?) and is rushed to the hospital. At this point, she decides to /not/ tell the family. In fact, /doesn't/ tell the family until nearly a month later, well after the press got wind of the story.

As much as crimes (in the plural) were clearly committed, this girl's story seems like a bid for attention. Am I doubting that she was on the phone at the time? No. But I am questioning whatever logic may have prompted her to /withhold vitally important information from the boy's own family/! Seriously, who does that? Who, after discovering your significant other has not shown up to school/work/etc, decides to hide that fact that you may have /heard the scuffle leading up to the murder/?

dub. Do all those questions, in any possible way, justify the police for not checking the phone records? That was the ONLY REASON, she was even brought up in this thread. Does this information in any way justify police for not even knowing that the call/testimony exists?

How could the police check the phones call history if it was not charged? Does anyone know if they detectives could even turn on the phone once they were given the case? Is endless unsubstantiated speculation the norm?

"How could the police check the phones call history if it was not charged? "

They had the cellphone for at least three days! They could have kept it longer if they needed to investigate. Are you seriously suggesting in the course of a police investigation the police cant charge a damn cell phone? Jesus christ! This is unbelievable

"Does anyone know if they detectives could even turn on the phone once they were given the case? "

Whether or not they could they can still call the phone company and get phone records, if not right away when they made contact with the family. Again just because they couldn't do it the first second they were at the scene doesn't mean they were excused. They call it an investigation for a reason, you fucking investigate!

"Is endless unsubstantiated speculation the norm? "

Are idiotic questions the norm?


Are you seriously arguing that a powered down phone, or an initially inaccessible phone is an impassible roadblock to an investigation.

"I'm sorry your honor, we'd love to prosecute but we don't have the victim's cell phone password"

Are you daft?

@Santa - I agree they should have checked it sooner. I'm saying they probably *couldn't* have checked it *at the scene*. Yes, as the evidence was processed, that should have been one of the primary things they checked. At a minimum, they shoudl have known within a couple days that he was on the phone and with whom (unless the phone was a burn phone or unlisted and even on the unlisted, they could have gotten the info from his service provider). But the police made their initial decision at the scene with the evidence at hand. I blaim the prosecutor for not following through and getting more from the crime lab. And if the police didn't bother to continuing their investigation, then I blaim them too. But I don't blaim the cops at the scene that night for letting Zimmerman go on his own recognizance.

Now, as for the thorooughness of the investigation, I don't recall reading anything to date where Sanford PD has declared their investigation closed. So how can we judge the thoroughness when it isn't even complete? That would be like looking at an unfrosted wedding cake and saying it looks like shit. Until it is completed, it won't be judgable as thorough or not.

News flash, they didn't only have the phone, they had the call logs, they just decided not to contact the number that was on the phone seconds before the altercation.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/police-chief-trayvon-martin-case-resigns-temporarily-amid/story?id=15977847#.T3HaLvkb5Zc

"So how can we judge the thoroughness when it isn't even complete?"

Draug, so you are prepared to call a police investigation into a shooting that doesn't contact a potentially key witness within a month after the shooting as thorough?

from the article

The list of possible police missteps uncovered by ABC News is long: The department allegedly ignored some witnesses while failing to follow up with others. One officer "corrected" the testimony of an eye witness who said she heard "the boy," Martin, crying out; the officer allegedly told the witness that it was Zimmerman who was screaming for help.

Most egregious, say experts, was the failure of the department to follow up with Martin's girlfriend, who was on the phone with him in the seconds before Zimmerman confronted Martin and shot him dead. Police had Martin's cellphone call logs but never reached out to the girl, who said that Zimmerman followed, pursued and accosted Martin.

"That's a serious, serious fatal flaw," said Rod Wheeler, a homicide investigator who is not involved with the case, "and it could be a fatal flaw in this investigation. And the police department definitely needs to go back, re-interview anyone and everyone that has any information."

The point is was the cell phone still actively charged by the time detectives got to it? Was the phone on its last bit of battery during the conversation? If the detectives couldn't get the phone to turn on they wouldn't know if there was a converastion. They spoke to the parents who obviously didn't say they had been talking to their son that night on the phone. Characterizing the police as not giving a crap because they didn't follow phone records isn't logical. Stating the police weren't thorough is a logical inference. The DA's office didn't consider the cell phone in evidence either. So the DA doesn't give a crap either based on this line of reasoning?

ABC news says? Seriously?

"The point is was the cell phone still actively charged by the time detectives got to it?"

The point is who gives a fuck, that is the most irrelevant question you have asked an yet you continue to use it. A thorough investigation wouldn't let a charged down phone stop from investigating a shooting for christs sake

"Was the phone on its last bit of battery during the conversation? If the detectives couldn't get the phone to turn on they wouldn't know if there was a converastion. "

This, AGAIN, is an investigation, the fact they cannot at the first second they see it, turn it on is irrelevant, they took custody of it.

And it is a moot point, they had the call logs but didn't make the call

"ABC news says? Seriously?"

Coming from a guy that thinks a powered down cell phone can stonewall an invetigation.

'Hey guys! Does anyone have a charger with this head to it? No? DAMNIT the Fucker got away with it AGAIN!'

'Don't worry bob, his next victim will use a LG, and then will get him, just you see...'

while I'd love to be talked in circles all day, I got shit to do. later.

How many people in this thread haven't been tainted by media sensationalism in this case, much less the prospective jury pool in Florida. The media has also said Zimmerman had a broken nose and a witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman banging his head on the ground. Who cares? It isn't evidence until it is presented in a court of law. It's unsubstantiated media speculation. We have the justice department investigating. We have a special committee set up by the Florida. Yet Zimmerman should be arrested and the immediate judgement by police and DA thrown out completely as totally erroneous? Why not let the new investigations continue assuming the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. What a concept?

I trust ABC news' reporting about as much as I trust Fox's. no, scratch that. I trust it *even less* than Fox's. Seriosuly, wasn't ABC the folks who shot a missile at a truck then claimed it had spontaneously combusted on a rear impact?

Get real, ABC news doesn't know that the police had the call logs at the scene.

And I've already agreed that the police failed in their duty by not following up much sooner than a month later. But small town police are prone to error. After all, the little towns get Barney Fife while the big cities get Mac Taylor.

seriously both of you can take a flying leap, you all want to distort what I am saying fine. E-mac has been carrying on for 12 hours interrupted saying the "investigation should have been allowed to take its course" when it is obvious there was no investigation or a shoddy one at best. All three of you can nitpick, twist my words, and try to drag me into other arguments all you want. My point remains what it was from the beginning, if it wasn't for the media, this wouldn't have been investigated, it wasn't for a month after the killing, and it wouldn't have been if the situation hadn't been put on blast.

Go ahead, ask another 6 irrelevant questions or nitpick about sources or if his phone was powered up or not. This is ridiculous. How fucking hard is it to agree? I did several times with your point, yet you don't stop ham fistedly waving it around like I am arguing against it.

Trusting what is printed or posted in media reports producing two pictures of Martin. !1st-clean cut kid walking back from 7-11 with nothing but Skittle and a sale phone. 2nd- Tagger/Pothead/thief from a troubled home who had already been busted with women's jewelry by school police, suspended multiple times with two parents who never even talked to school officials about their son getting suspended. This kid was walking through a wealthy neighborhood he didn't live in casing the area for a quick score and got pissed off when someone followed him so he jumped him and was kicking his ass before he got shot.

Is either media report accurate or trustworthy? Seriously? Let the justice system runs its course. The local police and DA have been overruled. The grand jury convenes in April. Quit derailing the process and let it work because it will produce a story of the crime totally different than the media sensationalism. Waiting requires patience and faith and those seem in low supply for those that want to trust their reading of the media and condemn the system as not worth a crap.