George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin General discussion #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
With that in mind...how did GZ sustain injuries to the front and back of his head at the same time?

I asked my husband this last night and I am curious as to what you all think?

A scenario I have been mulling lately is this-

GZ approached TM, questioning him.
TM likely had some attitude, being a teen age boy.
TM likely said something smart arse and tried to walk away.
GZ grabbed his arm (or shoulder,something along those lines).
TM turns and gives GZ a crack on the nose.
GZ falls, possibly hitting the back of his head causing the scratches.
GZ is PO'd, gets up, and pulls his gun.
GZ shoots TM.

*ALL MY CONJECTURE, NONE OF THESE ARE PROVEN OR FACT*
 
Not particulary, because if you look in any of half a dozen other dictionaries and get something like this:


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pursue

What I understand is that you just spent a very long time talking in circles about intent only to come back to an argument that an armed GZ wasn't chasing someone because that would only be accurate if used as a noun instead of a verb, which isn't true. This isn't something I just made up for the heck of it. What GZ did absolutely qualifies as chasing.
But not according to the definition you previously posted. It was not in the scope of what you were trying to say. That's all I was getting at.

And you linked to the definition of "pursue" there?
 
A scenario I have been mulling lately is this-

GZ approached TM, questioning him.
TM likely had some attitude, being a teen age boy.
TM likely said something smart arse and tried to walk away.
GZ grabbed his arm (or shoulder,something along those lines).
TM turns and gives GZ a crack on the nose.
GZ falls, possibly hitting the back of his head causing the scratches.
GZ is PO'd, gets up, and pulls his gun.
GZ shoots TM.

*ALL MY CONJECTURE, NONE OF THESE ARE PROVEN OR FACT*

Well thought out. Thank you for the response :)
 
If that is true that no x-ray taken, it still makes me go humm because from what I understand he complained of his head being bashed onto the concrete sidewalk, like the backside of his head. No x-ray to me means it wasn't really that bad afterall. Not saying that's what happened, I'm still waiting for testimony of his injuries and I'm still on the fence.

No loss of consciousness documented or reported, speech was unaffected it seems, his pupils were equal and reactive, his bilateral muscle control and strength seemed to check out OK with the medics too. His boss was the one who sent him to be checked out the following day and he went to a PA, not an MD for that.
 
...but if you walked into an Urgent Care or ER and said "My head was smashed into the concrete sidewalk numerous times" they would definitely X-ray if, after a hands on exam, they felt there were fractures, or cefalohematoma.

My son had a CT scan after a punch to his eye. There were concerns of a concussion, eye damage, fractured occipital orbit fracture. The entire side of his face swelled, that eye swelled shut. He was 10 and the one that punched him was 16....

There was none:) just lots and lots of swelling.
 
IMO, not only is this judge suggesting answers to the witness, she's also suggesting questions to the prosecutor.
 
Taking one action to pull a trigger and bashing your head once on the concrete - ouch! - and continuing to do that over and over again are different, no? MOO

No more bizarre than the rest of GZ's behavior IMO...
 
She needs to be asked if the same person who wrote the letter helped her prepare her testimony for this trial. IMO
 
How does a phone falling on concrete differ from a phone falling on grass, especially if it's knocked off a person? Wouldn't it just sound like a bump?

Really? We are going to discuss the fact that a solid object falling on concrete will sound the same as something falling on grass to the person hearing it?

I can't explain it any better, sorry.
 
She's already been reversed once by the court of appeals in this case, and very recently in another. You'd think she'd be more careful, imo
After surviving Jodi Arias' trial, I am really grateful for a decisive judge.
 
Is there a legal person posting here? I'm curious as to the judges rulings on objections here.
 
If George does not understand 911 when they say we would kindly appreciate if you really don't mind stop following the man in question. If he doesn't understand this he should be 100 yards away from any firearm.
 
If George does not understand 911 when they say we would kindly appreciate if you really don't mind stop following the man in question. If he doesn't understand this he should be 100 yards away from any firearm.
Except that's not what the non-emergency number operator said.
 
She needs to be asked if the same person who wrote the letter helped her prepare her testimony for this trial. IMO

This whole thing seems insane. Who wrote the letter? She signed with one of her aliases? Did it have to be written in cursive for some reason?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
1,952
Total visitors
2,093

Forum statistics

Threads
600,028
Messages
18,102,888
Members
230,971
Latest member
Gigi2023
Back
Top