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
Don,,were you asking -‘What did Elaine say?’ or are you in need of going to syntax class 101?
I’ve noticed Mr. Turley’s bias from the beginning, wanting to exonerate Zimmerman. And now with this photo showing some blood on Zimmerman’s head, I see Mr. Turley seizing a perceived opportunity to have his bias vindicated. If there is to be a bias, it should be for the poor child who was doing nothing wrong, and in fact was well within his rights throughout, from being where he was in the first place to himself “standing his own ground.” You simply don’t get to pursue a child, and then use deadly force when the child gets justifiably scared enough to defend himself. I’ve lost a lot of respect for Turley on this one. Having a bias favoring Zimmerman is disgraceful.
What Elaine said.
Elaines BIASED and slanted point of view regarding this tragedy is reflective of what is wrong overall with the media presentation.
Matt, to add to your point regarding incitement.
Why is Spike Lee not being charged for incitement of violence when he STUPIDLY ‘tweeted’ what he ASSUMED was Zimmerman’s address? Especially knowing that the new black panthers had put a bounty on Zimmerman’s head. Although Lee has publicly apologized and had to compensate the elderly couple that actually lived at that address, he has not been charged based on the law.
TalkinDog,
If my teenage child had been killed by some “neighborhood watchman” who was carrying a gun and who had ignored a police dispatcher when he was told not to follow my child, I’d want the person who killed my child to face charges. Zimmerman needs to answer for what he did. Zimmerman brought the confrontation upon himself. The truth needs to be uncovered. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Matt
I think that anyone should be keeping a watchful eye.
If someone, whether in Neighborhood Watch or not sees something they believe is suspicious, they would do well to take note of the advices given in the Neighbourhood Watch handbook.
https://www.bja.gov/Publications/NSA_NW_Manual.pdf
“Patrol members should be trained by law enforcement.
It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers and they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles.
They should also be cautioned to alert police or deputies when encountering strange activity.
Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous.”
Zimmerman broke all the rules.
“Provoking” an attack in not the same as being an aggressor. The aggressor is the person who attacks first. In my OPINION, Trayvon is the aggressor. Do I know that for a fact, absolutely not, but injuries to Zimmerman are congruent. Not to mention that if you read the police report the officer on scene that night stated the back of his jacket was “wet and had grass stains” and there was a witness who stated that he saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him and that Zimmerman was yelling to him for help (the incident happened in the front yard of the witness).
Ok SlingTrebuchet, I will also re-state something I said in the original statement. It was NOT illegal for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon, it is not illegal for you or myself to follow someone on the street who may look “suspicious” or “up to no good.” Now, who was the aggressor? NO ONE knows without a shadow of a doubt who was, but I re-state also, Trayvon did not have any marks on him that shows that he was hit at all. Zimmerman did, and that leads me to believe that Trayvon was the aggressor.
I agree with Jonathon T on this on the over charging. I would go farther. There should be no criminal charge. This guy has been tried in the media like someone charged with assault upon a wheelchair bound school child by a gorilla back in Nazi Germany. When is a person no longer a child in Florida for purposes of charging him as an adult? A 17 year old male can be one bad hombre. The CNN and Fox faux journalist schmucks depict the dead guy in a photo taken years before the incident. They describe him as off on a lark to get candy. His mom and dad cry on television for justice. The cops are vilified. Zimmerman is depicted as either whining in his mug shot or grinning from ear to ear in his car license mug shot. If I was defense counsel I would pray that he has a scar on the back of his shaved head. I would photograph it and then have him start growing hair for trial. I would put on every witness who saw him that morning, that day, in a jovial mood. I would put on his Priest and violate his oath and say that Zimmerman spoke well of minorities during Confession. I would put on the cop who arrived on the scene and took the bloody head photo and take photos of the concrete if the cops have not done so already–hopefully photos with blood and ruff uneven concrete at that.
How many times did he slam your head into the concrete before you could reach the revolver? When it went off did you intend to fire it? How many times did it go off? And you were on your back getting your head pounded into the pavement when it went off? Did you ask for his drivers license to obtain his age or date of birth prior to the second that he jumped you and started pounding your unprotected, hairless head into the pavement? So you did not know he was 17? You already cried and said that you are sorry but what is it like to rot in jail over this and see yourself on tv being vilified by the likes of Al and Jesse?
I saw his lawyer on tv myself and like him. The two jarheads who were yakking on tv before they retired from his case should take up garbage detail.
The jury will take lunch after they retire for the verdict and acquit him within six hours of total deliberation. They will be taking odds in Vegas and remember my prediction, if you are a betting dog.
Interesting stories Darren. Confusion is confusion no doubt. But there is a huge difference between law enforcement performing their duties, and cowboy vigilantes provoking encounters. Besides the fog of war aspect, we’re not talking about the same thing. Strip away the presumptions that go with being law enforcement.
——————-
Matt, there is a difference between “being attacked”, and “provoking an attack”. You are altering even the few facts that are reasonably assumed.
Thank you Bosco. I’ll also add that if they are going to take Zimmerman in and charge him with 2nd degree murder then why haven’t they gone after the black panther movement for inciting panic and delivering death threats (of which I might add that they tried to “deliver” those death threats when they recieved a tip as to where Zimmerman was at. They actually showed up to a house of an elderly couple.)
Matt: “I’m sorry but all of your statements about “Zimmerman following Trayvon,” in my opinion, are false.”
I expect that the prosecution will produce a timeline from Cellphone calls, 911 recordings and witness statements that might clarify where people might have been at times during the incident.
Looking at the maps of the area, it is clear that Zimmerman left his vehicle on the road way and moved a significant distance up along the pathway that led between the buildings.
Unless Martin dragged Zimmerman from (near) the vehicle and all the way up that path, Zimmerman *was* following him.
The timeline may be able to show how much time passed between 911 saying “we don’t need you to do that” and the altercation breaking out.
I disagree with you SlingTrebuchet on a couple things. As far as I’m concerned a “neighborhood watch” is always on duty. If I lived in a gated community with recent break-ins, I would have a watchful eye at all times, on duty or not. As for him having a gun, it doesn’t really matter. Either way you look at it he had a valid CCW in the state of Florida and he had is gun on him. I have a valid CCW here in Ohio and I’ll tell you this, I never leave my house without it. Why, you might ask? Because I’d rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
Matt, you make very good points. One of the biggest points is the
“race baiting” issue. There is no doubt at all of the media pundits and activists added to the initial frenzy and rage. As an example regarding the media, I never would have imagined that I would be in complete disagreement with Bill Maher and in complete AGREEMENT with Bill O’Reilly.
Bosco says ” In ALL communities our police departments have always declared the NEED for the community INVOLVEMENT in keeping our neighborhoods safe and free of crime.”
That triggers a question that I have not seen clarified.
From the outset, Zimmerman was described as a “Watch Captain” in his local Neighbourhood Watch.
This appears to have been a move to endow him with some sort of quasi-legal authority, and to lessen the pressure to question his actions.
Was he actually a member of Neighbourhood watch?
If he was, was he on duty at the time?
If he was, and whether or not he was on duty, why was he carring a weapon? It appears that Neighbourhood Watch members are told *not* to carry weapons, and presumably told why they should not.
If he is in Neighbourhood Watch, what sort of training had he undergone?
If he is a Captain (implying a higher level of training and expertise), who are the Lieutenants, Sergeants and Patrol cops?
My own view is that this is not a racially-driven incident per se.
It’s a Walter Mitty with a real gun incident.
It wasn’t premeditated. It was simply an almost inevitable result of an incompetent fantasist being permitted to carry a weapon and to play at being a cop.
I’m sorry but all of your statements about “Zimmerman following Trayvon,” in my opinion, are false . If you listen to the 911 tape the dispatcher doesn’t say “we don’t need you to do that” until almost the end of the conversation. The call ended roughly one minute after the dispatcher told him that, so no one knows without a doubt that Zimmerman had continued to follow him. Second thing, even if we knew for a fact that Zimmerman continued to follow Trayvon after being told “we don’t need you to do that,” he didn’t have a “legal obligation” to stop following him and keep an eye on him. A dispatcher stating that isn’t law, it is more of a “suggestion.”
Either way you look at it, no one knows without any doubt, which one was the aggressor. If you want to look at it injury wise, did Trayvon have any injuries besides the gun shot? We can see clearly in this picture that Zimmerman DID have injuries congruent with his statement as to what happened. All evidence I have seen so far points to Zimmermans statement being correct.
To all of you who want to say the “law is the problem,” it is not. The law is for OUR protection, and if Zimmerman’s statements are correct, it was used in this case in a correct manner. If it were me in this situation I would have done the exact same thing without a doubt in my mind.
To all of you who want to say this is a racial issue and are also relying on what “the girlfriend” said she heard over the phone are ignorant and moronic. This is in no way, shape or form a racial issue, this is a case of a man being attacked and defending himself. You also cannot rely on the girlfriends statement alone. You really think she’s going to say something that is going to put her “boyfriend” as the aggressor? No, she would not. That’s also called hear-say in the courts eye.
The media is the biggest disgrace in this whole situation. I’m sick and tired of their race baiting and trying to make this an all out war between races. Look a little deeper into what the media has done throughout this whole case, maybe then it will make you open your eyes a little more.
Hey, Zimmerman hunted Martin like an animal! Zimmerman was told not to folllow Martin by the 911 operator. Zimmerman provoked the confrontation that led to the killing.
“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”
I really must strongly disagree, both on “most important” and “significant blood”.
The most important piece of evidence will be the ballistics report. What can that tell about where the two were in relation to each other?
Coupled with that , and perhaps equally important, would be a determination of which of them was “wailing No”.
If Zimmerman had drawn his gun and had thereby halted the altercation – no matter who had started it – then firing that gun was excessive. This is *particularly* so if it was Martin that was shouting No. That would make it an execution.
Even if Zimmerman had been going about normal business and Martin had made an unprovoked assault on him, shooting a person who is “wailing No” is murder.
As for the blood, I’ve seen more alarming flows from a nose-bleed. If there is no sign of bandaging in the police video, this might indicate that the cuts were very minor. If we accept that this is a proven photo of Zimmermans head, all it shows is that he got some minor cuts. The amount of blood in irrelevant. Zimmerman could not see the back of his own head.
The fact that there was a fight does not appear to be in dispute. Any cuts simply support that. The fact of the fight does not give Zimmerman a free pass, particularly as he was the instigator.
Zimmerman provoked the entire incident. It’s clear that he was following Martin. It’s clear that Martin, going about his lawful innocent business, was alarmed by some stranger following him.
I know this is lengthy but please read my posting. I hope you all will not get into this type of situation but I want to impress it can happen and to always keep an open mind despite all the facts know to you.
I haven’t spoken about this publicly but wanted to relay this incident that happened to me just a couple years before I retired from LE in the hope it will provide some understanding. It has some similarity to Mr. Zimmerman’s Case and I invite you to read it because it illustrates very clearly what can happen and a tragic event can take place despite reasonable actions from both sides. First remember Zimmerman’s 911 call, and what was described by Trayvon’s friend of what he was describing as Zimmerman following him.
I was at work patrolling the NW portion of the county late one night. Suddenly, a very broken radio call came out from a detective on our multi-agency narcotics team (who patrol did not know was working an assignment that night) came on with a distressed voice saying their cover was blown and they were getting shot at. The reception was bad and the dispatcher was suddenly not able to reach them.
I responded from about 12 or 13 miles away, driving as fast as I could, and occasionally receiving very limited updates such as the team was staking out a grow operation, that two of the suspects had seen the officers and started shooting at them. The shooters then got into a vehicle and began circling around looking for them with their lights out, the location was then unknown. (Rural farming area). I and an officer from a city nearby who was 45 seconds behind me rolled into the area and I blacked out as concealment in case I received incoming fire. We pulled up and I waited a few moments for my backup to arrive. When he did I opened my door and suddenly someone on the radio came out “The suspect vehicle just pulled behind you.” (detective saw him on his IR scope).
There it was, suddenly 10 feet behind mine, and I was stuck between my car and my partner’s. I crouched down and we both drew down on two men who were in the pick-up Fearing that we were about to be ambushed, I ordered both of them in English and the Spanish to put their hands out the window. The passenger complied, the driver refused to comply. He then began reaching under the dash and making other moves consistent with hiding a weapon or accessing a weapon. After about a minute or so, despite constant yells and orders to have him show his hands, the driver continued to be non-compliant. I was convinced he might have a weapon and I was strongly considering taking him out and would have if he displayed one. Then he put only one hand out. But there was just something not right with him. I couldn’t put my finger on it, but at the time I was thinking “is there a possibility he was just some passer-by or something?” My mind was racing pretty fast.
Just before I decided to commit, the driver finally, and thankfully, put his other hand out the window. We waited for another cover unit to arrive and took the two men into custody. A loaded pistol and ammunition was on the floorboard next to the gear shifter; exactly where the driver was reaching. The pistol had been fired previously.
Aftermath. After all the dust had settled we then sifted through what happened. The drug task force had about 8 or so of its officers dressed out with M-4 rifles and their usual surveillance gear. They were in BDU uniforms. They were watching a suspected drug grow operation at a farm house where the operators were Hispanic. Suddenly, one of the pick-up trucks where two men were working on turned its headlights on and the lights illuminated the team from a bit of a distance. A dog began barking and the two men saw them. One pulled out the pistol and starting shooting in their direction. The team took cover and called it in.
Now, the “Rest of the Story”. A man, (the driver described earlier). Three or four days previously bought a vehicle from another, rather unscrupulous person. The deal went bad and the seller of the vehicle later threatened to shoot the driver and repossess the vehicle. The driver then called our office to report the threats and the incident (we confirmed this happened). On the night of our incident, the driver and a friend were working on the vehicle when the friend turned on the headlights and the barking dog alerted them to several “guys with guns” sneaking around. The driver and the friend believed it was the seller making good on his threat to shoot him and take the truck back. The driver, fearing for his safety, fired warning shots over their heads to scare them off. He then lost sight of the men and he and the friend began driving around trying to locate them incase they returned. When the men came around a corner a few minutes later, they saw two police cars parked next to each other and drove up to report what happened.
See the possibility for tragedy here? The driver came millimeters away from losing his life due to what essentially came down to a complete misunderstanding of the other’s intentions. I don’t want to be dramatic here but it can happen like this. In my opinion both sides acted reasonably based on the facts believed to them at the time. Some might argue he should not have shot at the others but the two were never charged with assault, but were on the weapons offense because they unlawfully possessed the pistol.
I’m sorry for the length of this posting I tried to be brief. Allow Mr. Zimmerman the benefit of a fair trial curse him as you will for that is your right. But agree that Trayvon’s family has suffered a loss and understand they may grieve differently or the same as we do