Jack Dunphy continues the myths about George Zimmerman

I saw Jack’s acticle at PJ Media. He starts off well, pointing out that he always thought that George should not have been charged. Jack then attempts to dispel some myths about what happened that night, but Jack has himself fallen into the myth trap.  The sticking point is the nonsense “he should have stayed in his truck…. blah blah blah.”

Jack went on to give his version of what happened that night without realising that he has fallen into the trap of the “shoulda’s”.  No Jack, George did not go wondering about the complex. No Jack, George was not inside of his truck when the dispatcher asked the question “are you following him”?

So, once again, let’s go over the facts as they have been presented according to the NEN call. George Zimmerman was on his way to the shops when he spotted someone behaving suspiciously.  At the time he did not know the name of the person that he had seen, but he was to find out that it was Trayvon Martin. George called the non emergency line just as he had been taught by the Neighbourhood watch people. He gave an outline and a very general description based upon questions that he was asked. At no time did George state that he thought the person was suspicious because he was wearing a hoodie, or for that matter because he was black. During that conversation Trayvon Martin appeared to circle George’s car. This is described during the call. Trayvon Martin then starts to run, but giving a bit of a skip before taking off. George could not see where he had gone and he stated that he lost sight of the suspicious person. It was only after that point that George made the comment about the “punks who always get away”.

It was during this part of the conversation that George exited the car, probably after Sean Noffke had said something along the lines of “let us know if you see him…” or words to that effect.

Since George thought that he had lost the person, it is clearly doubtful that he was attempting to follow him, rather he moved from the car to see if he could spot the person and report on his location to the police when they arrived. After George got out of the car and was walking on the path, Sean asked the question “are you following him? ” and George replied “yes”, then came the comment “we do not need you to do that”.  It was an assertion, and not a positive command.

Now, according to George Zimmerman’s taped testimony, he had proceeded along the path to find the number of  house. After he had said “ok”, George had continued to the end of the path, gotten the number and began his return back to his vehicle. He was not actively engaged in looking for Trayvon Martin.

I make this assertion based upon how the evidence was found at the scene of the homicide. That is, George’s torch and keys were close to the end of the T intersection. This indicates the location where Trayvon Martin had approached George Zimmerman and then punched his lights out.

Trayvon Martin’s body was not found close to the T, but that only indicates that there was some kind of a struggle. George stated that he had tried to push Trayvon Martin away. Then he lost balance and ended up on the ground with Trayvon Martin on top.

Commentators need to be more careful in what they are saying because even when they are pro-Zimmerman, they seem to fall into the trap of the “shouda’s”.


6 responses to “Jack Dunphy continues the myths about George Zimmerman

  1. The old adage is true, say something often enough and it becomes the truth. The myths about that night will persist as they are ingrained now. Of course, everyone misses that George getting out of the car would be irrelevant had Mr. Martin decided to go on home, instead of coming back to get George. That is why getting out of the car is so important for some, as it provides, at least in their minds, a justification for Mr. Martin to attack, yet they fail to mention that they are admitting that George was right; Mr. Martin was dangerous, suspicious and unbeknownst to George violent.


  2. It is really amazing how many educated and seemingly logical thinking people say “he should have stayed in his truck” or something similar.

    Serino is the root of this scandal. Wonder how he feels now about writing that in his report? Is it not true that almost all crimes could have prevented IF all parties in the incident had stayed in bed or the bathroom, or had parked themselves on a tree limb all day? How many reports has Serino written in his career with that kind of nonsense comment?

    A few of my best friends actually still think that George could have avoided the crime and that it did not have to happen. They believe George acted within the law but they, too, have fallen victims to this widely held belief.

    You gotta admit that Julison and the scheme team did an outstanding job of fooling many Americans. (Aussies, too.. LOL)

    Maybe those of us who think otherwise have developed a superiority complex or worse.

    Yup!! That’s it. We clearly know more than anyone else.

    My complex also says that this propaganda is how the total misunderstanding of self defense laws came to gain such popularity/notoriety. I read that almost half of Americans still believe that this was a SYG case.

    Is that ignorance or stupidity?


    • It is amazing how many do think that the case involves SYG.

      Mark O’Mara got it right when he refused to treat this as SYG and persisted in using self-defense.

      I had to do the crash course on SYG but even a novice like myself can recognize the various elements between the two types of defense, especially when they throw up Marissa Alexander’s case. Her case was neither self-defense nor SYG because she left the house, went to the car and fetched the gun.


  3. Your blogs get me all fired up.. humm.