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
(not just blood -broken skin on his knuckles. Broken skin that would be consistent with Martin punching Zimmerman.)
the evidence would be identical, if Zimmerman grabbed Trayvon Martin and Trayvon Martin defended himself, stood his ground so to speak.
There goes Malisha letting her imagination guide her.
How did Martin know that Zimmerman was armed when he followed him? Did Zimmerman catch up with Martin or was it Martin who circled around and confronted Zimmerman?
I do see a consistency here:
Zimmerman had a gun. He must be a bad guy wanting to shoot someone. Since he was a member of the Neighborhood Watch (not actually on scheduled patrol, but a member) he no longer had the right to carry a concealed weapon when heading to the store. (That’s what Sling is inferring.)
Back to the real world:
Zimmerman was in legal possession of his handgun. He was legally carrying it on the evening of Feb. 26th. His association with the Neighborhood Watch is irrelevant. There is nothing in the publicly disclosed evidence, at this point, that would permit Martin to assault Zimmerman. If Martin did assault Zimmerman, the injuries Zimmerman sustained may very-well be determined to be a justified use of lethal force in reasonable defense.
Why you people keep focusing on the irrelevant minutia is what baffles most people?
David Larry: “You might not like that Zimmerman found Martin to be suspicious. You might not like that Zimmerman followed Martin. None of that matters. Why? Because neither of those actions justify the use of force by Martin.”
Really? Well, maybe not in your opinion but there could be 12 peers in Seminole County, FL who would disagree.
Furthermore, the only person we have who could say that he did NOT start the physical confrontation would be the defendant, whose credibility might not really be too solid if he were on the stand in a trial.
No, I think the stories all of us have heard in children’s books, movies, inspirational lectures, and advice columns for at least 50-60 years about the nerd on the school ground who FINALLY beats up the bully so he doesn’t have to be victimized any more are going to have a place in people’s “common wisdom” and collective memory, so that when they consider what happened that night, with all the evidence before them (AFTER both prosecution and defense present their cases), they’re likely to think, “Was it justified of Trayvon Martin to physically try to overcome George Zimmerman on 2/26/2012?” and then they’re very likely to think, “HELL YEAH!” And all that sympathy poor George stirred up with his nose and his noggin will have a good chance of coming to naught.
If there’s a plea bargain, on the other hand, and he does a little time, he’ll be known INSIDE as the guy who got beaten up by a skinny scared unarmed KID. Woah! He might need a few lessons on how to skin his knuckles.
Tony C.,
I have read Florida’s SYG laws. Have you? I mean, Really?
Do you understand what it means to meet force with force? If you did, you wouldn’t be having such a problem recognizing just how important “Who threw the first punch?” is to the equation.
There is nothing contained in the current body of disclosed evidence that would permit Martin to use force against Zimmerman.
Zimmerman can legally refuse to answer Martin, just as Martin could legally refuse to answer Zimmerman. A refusal to answer does not justify the use of force.
“Martin did not “assault” Zimmerman in a legal sense”.
You’re either a fool or a tool. Martin physically assaulted Zimmerman. Zimmerman’s injuries (broken nose and abrasions on the back of his head) along with the injuries to Martin’s knuckles, all but settle that. The question then becomes “Were Martin’s actions legally justified?”. If you think that Martin’s actions were justified, point out how they would be justified under the applicable law.
We currently have no EVIDENCE indicating that Martin was “attacked” by Zimmerman, prior to Martin punching Zimmerman.
You might not like that Zimmerman found Martin to be suspicious. You might not like that Zimmerman followed Martin. None of that matters. Why? Because neither of those actions justify the use of force by Martin.
There is theme in this particular thread that seems to me to be completely wrong-headed.
Prof. Turley kicked it off in the opening post with “serious injury on Zimmerman’s head”.
The implication was that Z should walk simply because he had done badly in a fight. We won’t go into a “serious injury” that didn’t need hospital attention or even a bandage.
Now we have Martin’s hands showing signs of being involved in a fight.
The implication taken is that he must have attacked Zimmerman and that therefore Zimmerman should walk.
I was quite amazed at initial reports that there were no signs of injury on Martin. There were independent witness reports that the two were fighting. Going by the duration of the shouting picked up by one of the 911 calls, the fight appears to have lasted long enough for both to show signs of it.
It’s not at all surprising that Martin had marks. It would have been surprising if he did not.
The second Trackback at the bottom of this page has “Is that enough blood for you?”
The glaring problem with this ‘logic’ is that it completely ignores the lead up to the fight.
We know that Zimmerman was following Martin. We know that he followed him down a dark path at least as far as the spot where they both ended up.
We know (even from the 911 recording alone) that Zimmerman was anxious that ‘the suspect’ should not get away.
We know that by Zimmerman was in an intemperate mood (at the very least). We hear him in the recording venting his frustration and speaking of F***ing ****s.
We know that Zimmerman was (1) carrying a gun and (2) had not stopped at simply reporting his suspicions to the cops.
We know that Zimmerman purported to be Neighborhood Watch.
We know that (1) and (2) above are expressly counter to NW policy.
Any reasonable person would understand that NW policy on this is extremely sensible.
Any reasonable person would understand that Zimmerman’s actions were reckless.
We don’t know for sure how that fight got started.
Zimmerman says Martin jumped him.
Martin’s girlfriend says that the first contact has Martin asking a very reasonable question, Zimmerman ignoring that and making demands – followed by sounds of the scuffle starting.
We don’t know which of them was the first to actually get physical. No independent on-the-spot witnesses to that appear to have come forward.
Marks on Zimmerman and Martin simply confirm what witnesses reported. There was a fight.
However, the fact that there was a fight does not justify Zimmerman for shooting.
Which one of them was calling seems to be undetermined. Personally, I would not be surprised if it had been Zimmerman. His voice sounded to me like the kind of tone that would go high-pitched when highly-excited.
Certainly, Zimmerman seemed to be coming off very badly in the fight. However,while this might have been the reason that he fired, it is not an excuse that lets him walk.
The entire incident was proved by Zimmerman’s reckless following of Martin.
If Zimmerman were driving recklessly and someone died as a result, he would not walk free because (1) he had a driving licence and (2) the person killed did not appear to be a saint.
David Larry, I know you don’t like the way I deal with what you call the “evidence” even if you DO capitalize it — and I know you want to call certain things “evidence” and other things “imagination,” but that is the point.
None of us has ANY “evidence” yet because evidence is what is offered, challenged, and either excluded or admitted at trial. THere are RULES of evidence that need to apply to it.
So you have a lawyer who gets up there and says, for instance,
ZIMMERMAN PROFILED MARTIN
His task is to prove that with “evidence.”
He offers the Zimmerman tape. “Asshole” “punks” (or “coons”) etc.
etc.
Then he says, for instance, “ZIMMERMAN FOLLOWED MARTIN”
His task is to prove that with “evidence.”
He offers the Zimmerman tape. “Are you following him?” “Yeah.”
etc.
THEN the defense lawyer gets up and according to YOU, he has to prove that:
“At this point (not all evidence has been made public), it looks like Martin assaulted Zimmerman prior to being shot.”
Well now, how to prove THAT?
1 – Zimmerman has to testify — oops, problem — but let’s say O’Mara puts him on the stand.
2 – He says whatever he says — that Martin “assaulted” him. His proof? That he says it. He doesn’t say, of course, “I threatened him first” or “I threw the first punch” or “I scared him,” so naturally, everything he says is perfectly believable to the jury. Under these circumstances (trust the defendant because he never lies), nobody would be convicted of anything.
So, a kid who was running away (“Shit he’s running”) and then was being followed by an armed stranger “assaulted” the stranger?
Don’t worry, it’s just in my imagination.
But I bet O’Mara is thinking about this issue: How can ANY injuries on Zimmerman be used to change the picture when we know Zimmerman was the aggressor and we know the jury might not think Martin trying to defend himself was a crime?
I will bet you, Larry David, that O’Mara’s going to be wondering how many jurors might have JUST the kind of imagination Malisha has once that stuff gets into EVIDENCE.
O’Mara’s smart. He’s working on a plea deal and all the pro-Zimmerman sentiment being kicked up by his client’s poor bloody head and bad Trayvon Martin’s guilty knuckles are working toward him being able to make sure the whole picture never does get into a trial, so the evidence never has to be aired. He is a professional. And he will be well compensated. But “Martin assaulted Zimmerman” is a “he hit me first” that the playground bully uses when he’s been caught; should have been abandoned years before by anyone over seven years old.
@David Larry: At this point (not all evidence has been made public), it looks like Martin assaulted Zimmerman prior to being shot. There is NO EVIDENCE of Zimmerman having committed a crime prior to shooting Martin.
After Zimmerman was following him, got out of his car to follow him, and chase him, after Zimmerman refused to answer Martin when Martin asked him “why are you following me?” and chose instead the confrontational and accusatory language of “What are you doing here?”
All of that, which is ALSO going to be in evidence, is evidence that Martin did not “assault” Zimmerman in a legal sense, he was defending himself against Zimmerman who was pursuing him as if he were guilty of a crime: By Zimmerman’s own admission. Read the SYG law in Florida; Martin had every right to defend himself against Zimmerman, and since everything Martin did was in response to Zimmerman’s actions, that obviously makes Zimmerman the aggressor in this situation, no matter who threw the first punch, Zimmerman was terrorizing Trayvon Martin.
Malisha,
It is EVIDENT that you have a problem with distinguishing those portions of this case which are directly related to EVIDENCE and those you created in your imagination to try to fill in the blanks. You also have a problem understanding why forensic evidence would be obtained, and what role it could play.
I know. I know. Any EVIDENCE that doesn’t fit into your foregone conclusion must be fabricated or part of a grand conspiracy involving ABC.
Try thinking more and writing less.
Two injuries on Martin’s body: The fatal gunshot wound and broken skin on his knuckles. (not just blood -broken skin on his knuckles. Broken skin that would be consistent with Martin punching Zimmerman.)
At this point (not all evidence has been made public), it looks like Martin assaulted Zimmerman prior to being shot. There is NO EVIDENCE of Zimmerman having committed a crime prior to shooting Martin.
I know you want a second bullet, but no second bullet exists. Zimmerman’s gun did not load the second bullet from the magazine into the chamber. A good explanation for that would be that Martin had his hands on Zimmerman’s gun as he fired it, thereby preventing the slide from moving freely.
I’ve read lots of comments on this blog where irrelevant minutia is whipped into a frenzy, but you (Malisha) have gone well beyond that. You’ve created imaginary evidence and consistently tried to sell it, over and over again. That’s a problem. You need help.
Geometric logic, amirite?
no, amerite, nonsense.
lock it’slocks its doors atI am not checking the rest.
Maybe Z. saw M as someone he had never seen in this gated comm. and said gated comm. had to have a key to enter.
Bellissima, I have read, or strictly heard somewhere, from a US citizen investigator putting his work up on YouTube, that the gated community lock it’s doors at 19:00. Ironically there is a way to enter somewhere on the left corner of the “gated community”. There is no wall there. If you check the break-in reports you’ll find that one of the suspects once may have fled via this shortcut familiar to inhabitants. It’s around the area of Frank Taaffe’s home, 1460 Retreat View Circle, in case you want to look it up on Google maps.
I read someone on here, don’t know who, thought photograph of Z.head was manipulated,
No one claimed the photo was manipulated. But yes, there was an extensive discussion on a different thread, if the photo’s date and time could theoretically be changed. The question was purely theoretical. Could time and date be changed? …
I wonder if they found something at the crime scene that he could have used? and please don’t start name calling and being nasty.
Strictly I do not consider the scenario realistic that he harmed himself on the crime scene. By that time due to the fight and scream he must have been aware he would be watched doing something like that. Although strictly, it feels that only once people and/or police approach with flashlights the witnesses can perceive more clearly.
I’m sure our constitution doesn’t include lying in freedom of speech amendment.
Lying is preceded by e.g. the capacity of humans to err, to rely on hearsay and make the wrong assumptions.
Do you believe George Zimmerman did help to prevent burglaries? Did help to get one suspect arrested? If you think so you are wrong. You only need to look at the break-in reports in the community. One perpetrator was caught with the help of two outsiders in the community. Some say they were roofers, and one of them had his bicycle stolen, he thought by the same guy.
The other case was solved by Sanford police. A homeless black man was investigated in the context but he wasn’t the perpetrator, although he was the main suspect for the victim’s mother. Police in fact arrested a friend of her son, who had stolen the Sony Game Station and 11 games, since the guy tried to sell it and buy himself a new one. His mother wouldn’t give him any money for it. In none of this cases George Zimmerman was in any way involved.
That means 402 911 calls from the community including 12 by George Zimmerman didn’t help in a single arrest. Just as Taaffe’s claim that GZ in fact prevented a burglary with his 02/02/2012 call, is, take your pick, either deliberate lying in support of Zimmerman or simply an unjustified assumption by Taaffe. The same is true concerning this:
“He once caught a thief and an arrest was made,” said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association. “He helped solve a lot of crimes.”
Miami Herald
No one in the media ever seems to have contacted Sanford police to verify these statements. Maybe I should contact them and ask, are the eight break-ins in the gated community, which include a combination of vandalism and burglary in one case, and a pure act of vandalism against Fanny Mae property, all the break-ins that happened in that period?
In the case of the combination of vandalism and burglary a garage door was stolen in one house and a bathroom mirror shattered in the other. The premises weren’t locked. So strictly this is no break-in, or is it? This is slightly pedantic, I know, but should I really assume that everybody that uses the number eight is lying?
What was found at the crime scene was not recorded, so we do not know what was found at the crime scene. Here is a list of what was NOT mentioned or done at the time, or preserved, from the crime scene:
1. No mention of Martin’s phone or earplugs.
2. No mention of Zimmerman’s phone.
3. No ballistics on the gun.
3. No mention of the “walking-by” photographer or his cell phone pictures.
(Remember, Ayala said they saw Zimmerman, he handed over his gun,
he spoke of having cried out for help, NOT he made a call and was
photographed by a passer-by)
4. No medical reports from a hospital before taking Zimmerman in for his
questioning
5. No explanation of where blood was, no matter whose blood was there
6. No explanation of where blood was (except on Zimmerman’s nose and the back of his head, that is) or whose blood was there
7. No explanation of where blood was (except on Zimmerman’s nose and the back of his head, that is) or whose blood was there
8. No explanation of where blood was (except on Zimmerman’s nose and the back of his head, that is) or whose blood was there…
And still, we’re getting confirmed “bits and pieces” of an autopsy report, but no autopsy report?
If you go back and read the ABC-originated reports, by the way, you see “bloody knuckles,” not just skinned knuckles. And — how many knuckles skinned? Which hand? Traces of Martin’s skin on Zimmerman’s face anyone? EMT reports on that anyone?
To me, the most significant part of this selective “confirmation” of “information” from the autopsy report is the following: O’Mara doesn’t wany any more of it to come out.
As soon as there’s another downturn in the case for Zimmerman, we’ll have a few more selective pieces of the hidden evidence that get “given” to ABC News. Stand by.
I read someone on here, don’t know who, thought photograph of Z.head was manipulated, I was just wondering if you still think that, ;whoever posted it. Maybe if that’s true, then prosecution found object that he could break his nose, injure his head, and give himself two black eyes with.
My guess is that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey found a small bag of frozen strawberries and a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox lying on the grass knoll behind the houses where Martin was killed.
With such a bag of frozen strawberries, Zimmerman could easily have broken his nose and given himself black eyes, and with the duplicate key to the wardroom he undoubtedly injured the back of his head, and scraped up Martin’s knuckles.
Then when he was done, he simply throws the strawberries and the key away.
I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers…
Geometric logic, amirite?
1. Injured knuckles not bloody knuckles.
2. Stupid ABC, definitely in on it, definitely in on it.
3. Uh oh, fifteen minutes to Judge Wapner.
anon
i posted the comment about the prosecutor not examining Z. medical records too quickly. The lead investigator that testified at bond hearing said he had never seen any records of Z. injuries, nor requested to see them. I read someone on here, don’t know who, thought photograph of Z.head was manipulated, I was just wondering if you still think that, ;whoever posted it. Maybe if that’s true, then prosecution found object that he could break his nose, injure his head, and give himself two black eyes with. Maybe he was thinking of this defense all the time he was talking to the police. I wonder if they found something at the crime scene that he could have used? and please don’t start name calling and being nasty. i have legit questions and most of you, although not smarter, have more knowledge of this case. Mainly because I won’t watch media reports and only have read few articles, due to having first hand experience how they can unjustly ruin someones life. I don’t understand why they can’t be charged for out and out lying. IS it because freedom of speech. Like I said, lots of you guys have more understanding of law and facts then I do. I’m sure our constitution doesn’t include lying in freedom of speech amendment.
It’s interesting that at the beginning of this whole news item, in early March, the information was out there that Trayvon Martin was unarmed, that he was carrying skittles and iced tea, that he was wearing a hoodie, that Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain, and that he had not been arrested after shooting the youth because he said he had been jumped from behind as he was returning to his vehicle from the place on the sidewalk where he had gone to check out the street sign.
When the attention began to heat up, the “jumped from behind near the car” story, which was no longer very useful because of the developing evidence (of the conversation with the girlfriend on the cell phone), seemed to vanish from the reports and instead, we heard from Zimmerman’s then lawyers that Martin had broken their client’s nose and slammed his head over and over on the concrete, so that he had to pull his gun and shoot in self-defense.
After the video in the police station was revealed, there were “enhanced” pictures around showing a cross-shaped something-or-other on the right-side crown of Zimmerman’s head as he headed into the station house.
Then things heated up for Zimmerman some more and the two lawyers issuing statements about him began to sound a little more doubtful every time, but still had “broken nose” and “slammed head” stories.
Then info. “leaked” that Trayvon Martin was not perfect and folks began to shift their attention from his murder to his high school transcript.
Then the prosecutor charged Zimmerman with murder.
THEN — only THEN — a picture came out that led this thread and which Professor Turley announced as “showing serious injury” to Zimmerman, suggesting that the picture showing serious injury could imply self defense! And how did that picture come into public view? Through ABC News which “was given” that picture. And who took that picture? ??? Who knows? Ask ABC News!
That came out right after a low point in the news for Zimmerman.
Then debate debate debate, and some pundits saying Zimmerman was overcharged, but the major point about the prosecutor choosing the charge she chose was THAT THE AUTOPSY REPORT HAD NOT BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC.
The single most important piece of evidence is probably the angle of entry of the bullet that killed Trayvon Martin.
But ABC news never got ahold of that part of the autopsy, and still hasn’t.
Then debate, debate, debate, and some pundits saying this and that, but O’Mara, Zimmerman’s lawyer, says he does not know how or if that picture with the rivulets of presumed blood will be used by the defense. And O’Mara is a good lawyer.
Then another low point for Zimmerman: The Virginians who put out “TRAYVON MARTIN TARGET PRACTICE POSTERS.” This was a VERY low point in the news for Zimmerman, especially because the manufacturers of this brilliant thing printed that “Of course” they supported George Zimmerman, who by this time has had to say that he was sorry for Martin’s family’s loss!
O’Mara immediately called it “disgusting” as any good defense counsel would, but still, it was and remains a low point for the publicity campaign to stir up sympathy for poor injured George Zimmerman who just HAD to kill a kid that night.
And what happens in the middle of that new low point?
ABC News again. “Confirms” two items from the autopsy report? Where is that report, has it been released?
One report claims that Martin’s knuckles were “bloody.” Wouldn’t they be, if his body was found on the ground, face down, bleeding out into the earth, with his HANDS UNDER HIM as stated in the police report? I think they pretty much WOULD have been bloody. Anything UNDER Trayvon Martin’s chest when he was shot would have been covered in his blood.
And medical reports that have not been released also “confirmed” two black eyes (this, to conform to the folks all over the web who claimed that George Zimmerman WOULD have had two black eyes if his nose had been broken) and “abrasions” on the back of his head — or was it “two cuts”?
So it goes:
1. Zimmerman’s doing OK and nobody’s blaming him.
2. PUBLICITY PUBLICITY PUBLICITY
3. Zimmerman is charged with murder – low point for Zimmerman!
4. Picture of Zimmerman’s bloody head (not taken by police or EMTs)
(Exclusive from ABC)
5. PUBLICITY PUBLICITY PUBLICITY
6. TERRIBLE PUBLICITY BECAUSE OF TRAYVON MARTIN TARGETS
7. Low point for Zimmerman!
8. ABC again: “confirmed” selective information from autopsy report, which has not yet been released to the public, and “confirmed” medical report about George Zimmerman’s broken nose and abraded head
And what does O’Mara say?
He says he wants the evidence to NOT BE RELEASED.
OK, logically, this means three things to me.
First, the little bits of evidence we are being fed may be creating an impression, but Zimmerman’s lawyer does not want any more evidence to become public — now that pieces of it already are — and that means to me that if the police reports, 911 calls and the full autopsy report were to be revealed, this would not be as easy a springboard to jump to conclusions on.
Second, all this about Zimmerman’s injuries and Martin’s knuckles are STILL irrelevant because you can’t just advance on someone and pick a fight with them and THEN claim self-defense if you get hurt so doing.
Third, there is a real need down there in Florida to keep pumping up bits and pieces and suggestions and “confirmed” snatches of eivdentiary material that hides more than it reveals and leads to more questions than answers, but it does look like it is being designed to throw the publicity into a blender so that ultimately, someone can say, “We will never know what happened.”
WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.
Zimmerman saw, disliked, and “marked” Martin as a target of something. Was he at that point, in the beginning, a murder target or not? Probably not. Probably just a target of Zimmerman’s free-floating resentment.
Zimmerman reported Martin and then began to follow him.
Police told Zimmerman he didn’t need to follow Martin — meaning stand down, we’re on our way. Zimmerman was not frightened at that point.
Zimmerman then confronted Martin.
Zimmerman and Martin had physical contact.
Zimmerman characterized that physical contact as hurtful to himself.
Zimmerman shot Martin dead and did not phone 911 for help.
Others did phone 911 for help.
Regardless of Zimmerman’s head, nose, eyes, or navel, regardless of Martin’s knuckles, it is going to be a long shot for a jury to say that Zimmerman is not guilty of murder or at the very least the lesser included offense of manslaughter. If that autopsy report has some information in it about the angle of the bullet(s) and the size of the wound (as in “how long would it have taken Martin to die, there on the ground?”) I wonder which news outlet has “confirmed” that information and where I may read it? It would make a lot of the “Zimmerman was hurt” information quite irrelevant.
One thing, though. The more there is sympathy for Zimmerman kicked up in the media now, the less the chance of a race riot if the plea deal involves Zimmerman walking away with a slap on his poor wrist. His non-limp wrist, understand: his manly, masculine, upstanding citizeny wrist.
8.
I keep reading that M. behavior that night was neither suspicious nor threatening and that Z was an over zealous, psycho, racist killer. I don’t understand how anyone can know that. Positively. Of course shano thinks I’m stupid and psycho.
I didn’t know that Z. could get a concealed carry permit if he had been charged with a felony. Could someone, maybe Matt or Bosco, whomever, doesn’t matter, answer that question for me please???.I also understood that anger management is always mandatory procedure of pre trial diversion cases. Also, the police that he allegedly assulted were plain clothes and he dad no way of knowing it at the time.Don’t remember charge but it was without violence. I did read that the domestic violence case was not proved and that Z was the one with scratched. I’m not actually defending Z. but I don’t think i’ts right to just think of one scenario only. I don’t understand why M. if he was that scared of Z, didn’t just keep going. I would have run like hell.But maybe he felt he had the right to stand his ground and kick GZ’s ass. Maybe Z was considering going back home after loosing contact with M. and that’s why he couldn’t definitively inform police of his exact location. I DON’T KNOW
The charge that the ‘special prosecutor’ brought against Z was done so without her neither asking for, nor seeing medical reports of injuries Z sustained. This is a SYG case and one would think that medical records would have been one of the first pieces of evidence to be considered, maybe right after the crime scene. It makes me wonder about the whole case now. I just don’t see how you can conclude what charges to bring against a defendant using SYG affirmitive defense if you haven’t examined said defendants physicians report of ( supposed )injuries.. How do they even know that they are consistent with Z’s statement ?. Z could have been lying his ass off and if medical reports were inconsistent, would have been charged differently and in a timely manner.. .
Maybe Z. saw M as someone he had never seen in this gated comm. and said gated comm. had to have a key to enter. And that’s what made him suspicious of M in the first place.
If somehow Z was innocent, and I’m just speculating, certainly not saying he’s innocent,nor guilty, then the fact is that we went by media reports, public opinion, a prosecutor that didn’t examine all evidence/injuries in a SYG case, and like Sharpton said, ‘we will march till Z is arrested’.and . judged very unfairly. What a miscarriage of justice it would be if Z. was/is being charged for murder just because of the reasons mentioned above.
shano i don’t go to ur links nor do i read ur posts because they are mainly deserving of a 5 yr. old that resorts to name calling.
Zimmerman had black eyes, nose fracture, records show
MIAMI — Court records show George Zimmerman had a pair of black eyes, a nose fracture and two cuts to the back of his head after the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
The medical records were part of evidence released Tuesday that prosecutors have in the second-degree murder case against Zimmerman. He has entered a plea of not guilty and claims self-defense in the Feb. 26 shooting. A message left Tuesday evening with Zimmerman’s attorney was not immediately returned.
Zimmerman was treated Feb. 27 at Altamonte Family Practice. A phone call made Tuesday evening to the practice rang unanswered.
ABC News first reported Zimmerman’s injuries from the medical records. Some of the injuries were previously reported by The Associated Press based on video of Zimmerman at a jail sally port.
That’s why the statement made by the funeral director was based on incompetence or an outright lie.
These are two pieces of EVIDENCE that clearly help to support Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/autopsy-results-show-trayvon-martin-had-injuries-h/nN6gs/
Tony C, right, exactly. But what they did to Alexander was to say that BECAUSE SHE SHOT but not AT HIM, that proved that she was NOT SCARED or she would have shot HIM. Since she was NOT SCARED she was not shooting in self-defense but shooting in ANGER so she’s guilty.
Courts are inferentially illiterate.