The evidence for the trial of George Zimmerman is slowly taking form. Yesterday, a medical report was disclosed by the family physician of George Zimmerman where the doctor found a “closed fracture” of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Trayvon Martin. While this is the family physician, it would still constitute important evidence in claiming self-defense, particularly when combined with accounts from the paramedics that found injuries to Zimmerman. An autopsy report released today also revealed bruises on Martin’s knuckles, consistent with a fight (though they could be bruises sustained in self-defense). In the meantime, the Justice Department has indicated that it may bring hate crime charges against Zimmerman — charges that would be questionable on the current evidence that has been made public in the case.
The prosecution is likely to explore any differences between the paramedics and the doctor. Some issues are likely to be raise such as whether the paramedics saw a broken nose and whether such “closed fractures” can be easily missed by a paramedic on an street at night. Moreover, such injuries could be sustained by Zimmerman as a result of Martin defending himself.
The leak of possible civil rights charges may be designed to try to get Zimmerman to accept a plea with prosecutors. I have reservations about such a charge based on the evidence that is available — as I have expressed over the overcharging in the case as second degree murder. This case has already raised serious questions of the influence of public pressure on the prosecutors. While there may be additional evidence that would support such a hate crime charge, the current evidence, in my view, falls short of the threshold showing needed for such a charge. The crime is defined as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.” The “in part” component gives some wiggle room for prosecutors but you need to still show clear intent on the race issue. While state courts have rejected the need under state law for race to be the “primary” factor, there remains unease in cases where race appears a secondary issue. The Justice Department has sometimes moved against defendants who were acquitted of the same offense under state law as in the Pennsylvania case involving the death of a hispanic man. These cases raise serious questions of when trash talk reflects racial motivations.
We have seen the same type of claim under “Stand Your Ground” in mixed-race shootings without such hate crime allegations. I have previously express unease over the standard used for hate crime charges and the decision to pursue some cases while refusing to move on others with similar or stronger facts. This is a case that could be explained as a crime-obsessed as opposed to a race-obsessed neighborhood watch captain. Indeed, Zimmerman’s past violent record may indicate that he is prone to violence generally. There has been no new evidence revealed that shows that Zimmerman’s shooting was race motivated. His own mixed race background and injuries from the fight militate against such a charge. They certainly do not rule out such a charge, but more has to be shown in my view.
The case is already over-charged as second degree murder. If the Justice Department is going to bring a hate crime charge, it better have stronger evidence than we have seen from Angela Corey to support a second-degree murder charge. Corey was in my view clearly affected by the public pressure in the case in charging the case as second degree murder rather than manslaughter. I am equally troubled by Attorney General Eric Holder discussing the case in public speeches when his department is supposed to be conducting an unbiased review of the facts involving a man who has not been convicted of a crime.
The combination of the leak on the civil rights charges and Holder’s public statements leave the impression that the DOJ will not accept acquittal as an answer in the case if Zimmerman does prevail. The impression, in my view, diminishes the appearance of due process and fair trial for the accused.
What do you think?
Source: ABC
@Arthur,
I wasn’t trying to dispute anything you had said, I was just trying to shed a little light on what “intermediate distance” seems to mean. In my mind, taken from that set of flashcards, and not knowing what the authority of the flash cards is, “intermediate distance” means: too far for soot to have collected on the wound, close enough for individual grains to strike the wound.”
But beats me, I think fights that are either not bare handed or with a Bat’leth are dishonorable.
anon, I checked the links and sources and NONE of them proved what the blog said. Not only that but I watched the bond hearing which was referenced in the blog, and I saw NONE of what they said was there. It is also very unusual in a bond hearing to go into detail about the evidence too. So not only was the blog wrong, it is unusual for what they said to have transpired to even happen at such a hearing.
As for the intermediate distance, taking your definition, of a few inches to a few FEET, is one hell of a margin. The only way to settle that is to see the photos. As for Martin being able to keep the slide from moving, there was NO documented report at all of that. Indeed the only way to confirm Martin had the gun near his hand is to do a nitrate test on his hands. As I have said earlier, it is extremely unlikely that a person would stay around when a gun was pulled on them, much less fight for it. You also seem to think that Zimmerman was simply lying on his back letting Martin beat the hell out of him without raising a hand in his own defense. Even a granny would do that much, but I guess Zimmerman was playing dead while Martin was beating on him?
As we all know, the truth and evidence will eventually be bought forth, and most of these questions can be proved in court.
thanks for the new info.
Arthur, for what it’s worth, and I have no knowledge of firearms,
Tom Maguire writes:
Zimmerman Case – Keeping Hate Alive At The Times
“Intermediate range” is described here (gunshot pictures not for the squeamish); the omniscient ‘cboldt’ advises us it is roughly a few inches to a few feet, presumably depending in part on whether clothing had an effect. Various references and graphic pics here, thanks to ‘paulo’.
Intermediate Range Definition: Hot powder grains accompany bullet to wound site & are driven into skin, leaving small red marks on skin – stippling/tattooing
Short & Close Range Definition: Bullet hole, stippling & soot present
Contact Range Definition: Bullet hole, muzzle burn mark & impression of firearm present; loose fit – near contact; cornea of soot may be present where weapon not placed directly against skin
(two links removed to prevent this comment from being spaminated.)
Florida teenager Trayvon Martin died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired from “intermediate range,” according to an autopsy report reviewed Wednesday by NBC News
That is the nail in Zimmerman’s coffin. So Z was either standing or on the ground when he shot Martin and the kid was a good distance away from him. There was NO fight going on when he was shot, and Zimmerman had pulled his gun, took aim and killed Martin as Martin was shouting for HELP!
Now I understand why the prosecutor filed murder charges on Zimmerman and why the DoJ may fle a hate crime charge and make him eligible for the death penalty. Now I understand why the cops did NOT buy Zimmerman’s story at the time. The prosecutor did not overcharge nor file those charges because she wanted a plea deal.
BarkinDog, depends on if his ‘original’ story jives with the evidence.
NBC News and msnbc.com
Florida teenager Trayvon Martin died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired from “intermediate range,” according to an autopsy report reviewed Wednesday by NBC News.
The official report, prepared by the medical examiner in Volusia County, Fla., also found that the 17-year-old Martin had one other fresh injury – a small abrasion, no more than a quarter-inch in size – on his left ring finger below the knuckle.
Defendant Z has to take the stand. No one else is a live witness to anything seen as opposed to being heard. He looks to me like he can tell a credible story. Self defense or the gun went off in the struggle. Defendant Z is the one looking the jury in the respective eyes and the eyes have it.
Anon nurse,
That is an amazing decision.
Malisha, I agree with Mike Appleton, but I would add Zimmerman to O’Mara. I think the big conflict with his earlier lawyers was actually exactly this: he will accept nothing but an acquittal and O’Mara is his lawyer.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Florida administration in 2012, I have two possibilities to get the old George Zimmerman court files. One is to phone them and give them my credit card details, honestly, the other way is to send them the money by mail. Florida in 2012? Mail the money or give me your credit card details? If I had anything to pay to them, I could do so online, but there is no way to handle the fees for the court files the same way? I find this hard to believe but that’s what a series of mails and one failed phone call ending on a voice mail box taught me.
Would any American interpret this as meaning, call me and give me your credit card details? I honestly would like to know.
Do people in the US pass on their credit card details on the phone so easily? It surely is against the rules I signed.
Technically it would be possible to “pay by phone” in Germany via your phone bill. My provider tells me it’s easy to do even with the States, not so in the US in the office of Clerk of Courts Lydia Gardner:
Previously she was teacher, a member and chairman of the School Board of Orange County, a real estate broker, and an executive with a Fortune 100 telecommunications company.
It’s either phone me and give me your details or send the money by mail. Not even a bank transfer was offered. Really, really strange.
@ Top Shot:
“i’ve seen words like stalked, hunted down, if that’s true then how did m. get away from z. ?”
Top Shot, he didn’t!
In fact, Martin did not get away from Zimmerman; he got killed by Zimmerman.
top shot
no one can tell you how things happened that night.if noone released that autopsy report how do you know anything? first, zimmerman faked the phone call to police, then he stalks m. and shoots him for no reason, then ABC pics of his injuries aren’t real, or maybe doctored.now the dr.that he did see is lying for geoge. to what, get caught in a federal case and loose his license, yeah right. doc can’t write a report if injuries aren’t there. sayong he made that up is just plain stupid. he was questioned for what 5.5 hrs. being that hwe a magistrates son why didn’t he ask for a lawyer. eye witness, zimm was hollering at him for help. where is all this info coming from if no evidence has been made public? dispatcher asked z. what color m. was, he said i don’t know. no race case there. this is the first time i read that he had his hand over z nose and mouth.maybe that’s why the dr wanted him to see e,n, t specialist AND THAT MAKES ME THINK THE INJURIES WERE AN ISSUE. . i’ve seen words like stalked, hunted down, if that’s true then how did m. get away from z. ? half the country is on medicine of some kind and it means nothing. now i want to know where this info came from so i can read it myself. I once heard a lawyer say in closing arguments that this case not only was riddled with reasonable doubt, ‘reasonable doubt lives here’ and to get on here and say anything with absolute certainty just shows how stupid everyone is… come on, lots of things could have happened that nite. i read that he, m had his hand over z mouth and nose. was he smothering or strangling him to death. m. should have just got the hell off of him, that makes him just as guilty as z. what the hell was he doing, trying to kill him?somebody puts there hands over my mouth an nose and i can’t breathe. something’s going to happen.. zimm has been portrayed as a monster. well, look up some info on martin. at the age he is now, not when he was 12. and whoever said that m. actions aren’t relevant to this case is just plain out dumb. his coming back, in my opinion, towards z, then jumping him makes much more sense then murder. why is t. mom get a tv com. when there is hundreds of thousands other people/kids died a violent death that week? other mothers weren’t given money to bury there son,daughter. she turned my stomach for filing a patton on her son. intelligence show it’s self in these blogs. 67 cd’s is an unimaginable amount of evidence. corey to me is overzealous. look what she done to that poor woman with the abusive husband..she should have had more sense then to even charge her. where is jackson, sharpton, and even martin at now? all you could see for days was those three. there is nothing being done because it is not a high profile case.
that and no whites were involved.
The job of a defense lawyer is extremely important, no matter what the issues are, no matter what the moralities of the situation are, no matter who the victims are. I respect that. I think that is essential in view of the fact that we have an adversarial, and not an investigative, legal system.
So it is good that O’Mara is very smart and I recognized that in him immediately, when he replaced the two bozos.
But look at his situation now, UNLESS the prosecution has already cut a deal and everything is known except to the silly public who are still buying tickets to the “justice theater of the absurd.”
1. If O’Mara puts his own witness on the stand to testify that it was self-defense, he risks a lot. I am betting that the voice analysis of the tapes will cut a deep groove (and NOT a vinyl groove) in the story that he was yelling “help help” before killing Martin. Furthermore, the initial story that Martin jumped him from behind has been abandoned, but it was recorded and attributed to Zimmerman before being abandoned.
2. If O’Mara does not put his witness on the stand to testify that it was self-defense, who does he have to say that it was? Not one of the 911 callers claimed to have seen an initial action; they called after they heard screams and other noises such as either one or two gunshots. A defense case cannot be built on guesswork; you need either physical evidence or testimony. Skinned knuckles on the body of Martin only prove that he was fighting, not that he was the aggressor; even if he had punched first, it is only Zimmerman’s now-damaged word that he did, and most people would presume that Martin throwing the first punch was (a) unlikely and (b) even if true, certainly justified by the implied circumstances.
3. Third party witnesses (other than Martin and Zimmerman) cannot easily come forward now that the police report has not named them. Even Frank Taafe would have a problem NOW stepping up and saying that he saw what happened. It would be the unheard word of the dead youth against the not-very-credible word of the defendant himself.
O’Mara has his job cut out for him. There’s more to the autopsy report than has met the eye so far.
Here’s the decision:
http://www.truthdig.com/images/eartothegrounduploads/Decision.pdf
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
————————————
CHRISTOPHER HEDGES, DANIEL ELLSBERG, JENNIFER BOLEN, NOAM CHOMSKY, ALEXA O’BRIEN, US DAY OF RAGE,
KAI WARG ALLA, HON. BRIGITTA JONSDOTTIR M.P.,
Plaintiffs,
-v-
BARACK OBAMA, individually and as representative of the UNITED STATES AMERICA; LEON PANETTA, individually and in his capacity as the executive and representative of the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOHN BOEHNE HARRY REID, NANCY PELOSI, MITCH
MCCONNELL, ERIC CANTOR as representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants.
OT: (Thanks to Swarthmore mom for posting the first link and I apologize for veering off-topic.)
Wednesday, May 16, 2012 05:14 PM EDT
“Federal court enjoins NDAA”
“An Obama-appointed judge rules its indefinite detention provisions likely violate the 1st and 5th Amendments”
By Glenn Greenwald
Excerpts:
The ruling was a sweeping victory for the plaintiffs, as it rejected each of the Obama DOJ’s three arguments: (1) because none of the plaintiffs has yet been indefinitely detained, they lack “standing” to challenge the statute; (2) even if they have standing, the lack of imminent enforcement against them renders injunctive relief unnecessary; and (3) the NDAA creates no new detention powers beyond what the 2001 AUMF already provides.
As for the DOJ’s first argument — lack of standing — the court found that the plaintiffs are already suffering substantial injury from the reasonable fear that they could be indefinitely detained under section 1021 of the NDAA as a result of their constitutionally protected activities. As the court explained (h/t Charles Michael):
In support of their motion, Plaintiffs assert that § 1021 already has impacted their associational and expressive activities–and would continue to impact them, and that § 1021 is vague to such an extent that it provokes fear that certain of their associational and expressive activities could subject them to indefinite or prolonged military detention.
….
The court concluded by taking note of what is indeed the extraordinary nature of her ruling, but explained it this way:
This Court is acutely aware that preliminarily enjoining an act of Congress must be done with great caution. However, it is the responsibility of our judicial system to protect the public from acts of Congress which infringe upon constitutional rights.
I’ve been very hard on the federal judiciary in the past year due to its shameful, craven deference in the post-9/11 world to executive power and, especially, attempts to prosecute Muslims on Terrorism charges. But this is definitely an exception to that trend. This is an extraordinary and encouraging decision. All the usual caveats apply: this is only a preliminary injunction (though the court made it clear that she believes plaintiffs will ultimately prevail). It will certainly be appealed and can be reversed. There are still other authorities (including the AUMF) which the DOJ can use to assert the power of indefinite detention. Nonetheless, this is a rare and significant limit placed on the U.S. Government’s ability to seize ever-greater powers of detention-without-charges, and it is grounded in exactly the right constitutional principles: ones that federal courts and the Executive Branch have been willfully ignoring for the past decade. (end of excerpts)
Anon nurse,
Thanks for the link. That is an important amendment.
Mike A.,
Great insight on the defense attorney!
The “previous post” I mentioned was referring to mine, not ARE’s.
The previous post doesn’t advance the topic much, but then, neither do most of the other posts. Or are we creating a record for “I told you so’s”?
If I were to defend myself against someone, I would reach for the vulnerable areas: testicles, nose and eyes, maybe the back of the head thru the chin. Whether I used a “squeeze”, the heel of my hand, my rigidly held finger tips, or my freshly manicured fingernails would depend on the area I was after. I would not use my fist. But then, I’m a “girl”. and I’d get only one shot at him.
The black eyes of Zimmerman are probably from the broken nose. I’ve had the embarrassment of black eyes after a toddler banged my nose by a sudden movement. Don’t know if my nose was broken or not but it really, really hurt. And the black eyes didn’t show up for several hours.
Malisha, I did say this case symbolic of all the wrongs in the US?
Now with the addiction of Pharma, it is the perfect case of concrete wrongs in America. Only the addition of Monsanto would make it more complete. Was he drinking too much GMO HFCS?
http://earthsky.org/science-wire/this-is-your-brain-on-sugar-ucla-study-shows-high-fructose-diet-sabotages-learning-memory