ABC News has been given a photograph that might make the difference between life in prison and a walk. For weeks, we have been discussing the case and the application of the Stand Your Ground law. As discussed earlier, I think the case was over-charged and I remain doubtful of a conviction. This picture will likely be the single most important piece of evidence in the case. It shows Zimmerman with significant blood on the back of his head — an image that supports accounts from the scene and will be used to corroborate Zimmerman’s account of a struggle with Trayvon Martin where he feared serious bodily injury. [UPDATE: Zimmerman granted bond].
Unlike the photos of Zimmerman at the police station, this photo was taken a few minutes after the fight. Zimmerman’s shaved head could prove Godsend for Zimmerman. Had he had longer hair, the injury would have not appeared so stark.
The photo shows both cuts and a contusion — injuries that would normally be defined as serious bodily injury by many courts in torts cases where head injuries are treated as inherently potentially serious. The original police report said that he was bleeding from the nose and head and that his clothes looked like he had been in a fight. Zimmerman claims that it was Martin who jumped him, punched him, and pounded his head on to the concrete sidewalk.
The prosecutors can still argue that they do not contest the fight but that Zimmerman started it. However, with this photo, the charge of second-degree murder appears even more excessive and undermines Special Prosecutor Angela Corey’s claim that she was not affected by the political pressure to charge Zimmerman. I can understand a manslaughter charge, even with the photo, but no reasonable prosecutor would consider the second-degree murder charge as based on this evidence. Corey clearly must have seen this photo and the reports before her charging of Zimmerman.
The photo should also assist Zimmerman in his efforts to get bail.
Zimmerman, 28, is still being held on charges of second-degree murder of Martin, 17. In my view, a denial of bail would be an abuse and unwarranted given the fact that Zimmerman cooperated at the scene and voluntarily turned himself in.
Source: ABC
Elaine,
It may have changed but generally all evidence is allowable so long as it is relevant and not highly prejudicial…It csn be very relevant…. But if the prejudicial values outweighs probative value then it can still be excluded… Even though it’s relevant…
Actually Elaine both….. There are 2 exceptions where it is not generally allowed and they are 1) rape cases ; and 2) domestic abuse cases….. On the other types of cases In order to try and get it admitted or excluded most generally a motion will need to be filed…. But at present…. It appears that it is possible to have it admitted……
Prior acts by the victim of a crime are not supposed to be allowed. That would be the moral equivalent of blaming the victims of the Green River murderer for being prostitutes. “But ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client is innocent of murdering this woman because she was a prostitute.”
AY,
The prior bad acts of the victims…the perpetrators…both?
and I forgot one…”the picture of Zimmermans head above looks like a fake.”: LOL Really? Come on!
Matt, in regard to the photo: I have not been following that closely but my recollection was that some one said that as a photographer they believed the photo was authentic.
I raised the question of the photo early. I still believe that the photo should be examined for the possibility of manipulation.
As far as to what is possible: I have very superficial skills. But I assure you that a person with my skill level and an inexpensive program like Photoshop elements could knock out a manipulated photo much like the photo we see here in a very few minutes.
Is that what happened here? I don’t know. But I do not believe that can be determined just by looking at the photo, certainly not from a distance over the internet.
I would like someone with expertise to examine the original photo and the original file. If there were some kind of manipulation there might be artifacts in the digital file that would prove that one way or the other.
In conclusion, I don’t believe anyone can say one way or the other based on what we see here or in other media outlets.
As far as I am concerned it is an open question.
BTW what originally attracted my attention was the washed out color of the scalp. I attribute that to overexposure from flash. But if the skin tones are totally washed out how does the color of blood map into bright red? I am not saying that is impossible, I am saying I don’t know and that is not what I would have expected.
Some simple test ought to easily determine what happens to the color of flesh and the color of blood when the photo is overexposed.
Sorry, I have gone on a bit too long on this. All I meant to say is that I believe the reliability of the photo is an open question and ought to be tested.
OS,
I disagree….. Sometimes prior bad acts are allowed…..to show conformity…..
The problem is that all of you are seeing this as Zimmerman killed Trayvon and should rot in prison. You don’t even want to look at the possiblity that Zimmerman was possibly (and I say that loosely) in the right. You all have it set in your head that he “absolutely followed Trayvon even after being told not to,” which doesn’t even matter if he had followed because it isn’t illegal for him to follow someone. The girlfriend says she heard the conversation between the two of them and you take her word as “law.” You all don’t have an open mind and can’t see the possibilities. Not all the evidence is out yet and you all are set in stone. You all see pictures of injuries to Zimmerman and some of you say “they were probably self inflicted” or “that doesn’t look like a serious injury to me, looks like scrapes.” Have an open mind people. Don’t rely solely on what the media is telling you because it will come back to bite you in the ass. The media has fed so many lies throughout this whole ordeal and you all eat it up and take THEIR word as “law.”
Matt, our posts crossed.
Agree with Malisha. Previous bad acts are irrelevant and inadmissible. Defense lawyers try to blame the victim all the time, but any alert judge and prosecutor are not going to allow that to get in.
Trayvon Martin’s history and personality are not relevant at all. Even if he were an escaped convict illegal alien whose DNA matched 10 unsolved crimes, Zimmerman had no right to follow him and kill him. This self-defense idea (Professor Turley’s defense orientation not withstanding) is a Zimmerman created drama that is really not worthy of a Pulitzer. Oh, and that dialogue daddy came up with: “You’re going to die tonight”? I would call that the line that made the producers decide not to back the script.
Otteray Scribe – Did you not just read my last post? It is irrelevant, I got off into a tangent. That is you as a parent, and you are probably a good one, but not all parents keep a watchful eye on their children.
Rafflaw – I can handle whatever is thrown at me. lol
Elaine,
I don’t doubt it! 🙂
rafflaw,
He certainly couldn’t handle my purse…unless he pumps iron every day!
😉
Elaine,
I have been AWOL today, but from what I have read, Mr. Matt couldn’t handle your purse!
Matt, it was a long barrel target pistol and it is MINE. She never asked for one of her own because she did not need one, although I did buy her a really nice compound bow. As for the target pistol, it is not for sale or for giving away. Right now she is after me to buy her a snub nose hammerless revolver with pink grips for her birthday.
To get back to the original point, so what if the kid had his photo taken with a firearm. That proves absolutely nothing.
Everyone – I’m not basing solely on that. I am looking at everything Trayvon himself posted, including the picture of him and the gun. It is irrelevant and I got off into a tangent. I digress – Media is the biggest problem in this and every other case that has ever come up. All I have been saying all day is that there is not enough evidence to convict or not convict. I, totallity, just state that I personally lean more towards the Zimmerman side because of the evidence that has been presented thus far. Now, all throughout the comments, I have had personal attacks that are trying to make me out to be a woman beater, a racist, and what I can only conclude as “less of a man” because I decide to carry a gun LEGALLY.
Matt,
I didn’t make you out to be a racist prick. I didn’t call you ignorant because you disgreed with me. I would never suggest that you shove anything in any orifice of your body. Calm down…and play nice now. If you’re a good boy, I’ll let you borrow my purse for protection.
😉
Being able to purchase a firearm at a gun store and owning one are two completely different things. There is a logical fallacy in your allegation, but am too tired to get into the details point by point. Suffice it to say that you are presenting a strawman argument. So it is in his clothes. BFD. You are as transparent as cellophane, so don’t play dumb. Every sentinent being who reads your stuff knows where you are coming from. I think most of us regulars here are not buying what you are selling.
mespo,
As long as you aren’t dragon’s breathing good scotch.
Matt, Matt, Matt,
Do all the straw men you create remind you of home in Oz and your flying monkey brethren? I never said anyone was a “beloved angel”. Let’s get this straight.
He was 16.
If he was anything like any 16 year old male I’ve ever known (including myself), he was about 1/2 jackass, 1/2 mouth and 2/3 testosterone.
However, you are assuming ownership from a photo. Do you have proof it was his gun? Do you have proof it was even a real gun? Do you have proof the picture was taken earlier that day or just immediately preceding the events that ended with Martin’s death? What you seem to have is a boatload of supposition and innuendo that any kid who has their picture taken with a gun is a prime facie criminal. “Wise” has nothing to do with it other than it is unwise to infer information from a single data point without any supporting supplemental evidence and assert them as fact. Your photo proves nothing relevant about the boy or this case. It is not connected to this case in any substantive way.
It’s irrelevant.
Otteray Scribe – Did you give your daughter the handgun at her age and tell her it was hers?