17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #17

[Adrienne37]

Your sources conflict themselves. And it appears that they are allowed in court under certain circumstances. So it would appear that polygraph evidence isn't never allowed in court.

JMO

My sources do not conflict themselves and in fact <mod snip> the links that were posted, <mod snip> many states do not allow them to be presented in court period; however, there are several states that do. In the state of Florida, it plainly states if both sides agree they can be used. If one party objects, then it would not be allowed in. Looks like a pretty simple thing to understand if you ask me. <mod snip>



~jmo~

 

[Dr.Fessel]

So what was Trayvon doing that made Zimmerman call LE?

Walkin about.

 

[Velouria]

EMS can't make him but can't the police drive him to the hospital themselves if they determined they were going to detain him and he had injuries that would warrant examination by a physician? Every hospital I've worked for in the state of Florida, we've always had many persons escorted in by LE to be assessed and cleared prior to being taken to the jail, questioning or otherwise. Why would LE assume responsibility for a person with a possible head injury if they weren't checked and cleared by a physician and then had a seizure or lost consciousness once they were at the jail? They could have the potential to open themselves up to a major lawsuit if the person that was detained wasn't cleared by a physician and ended up being paralyzed or perhaps even died.


~jmo~

Can't speak for Sanford PD but in general if the patient refuses medical that's good enough for PD. If they take him into custody and take him to the hospital, then the PD is responsible for the bill. That is why they usually call for evaluation before a person is arrested. In the eyes of PD, GZ had a medical evaluation and refused transport. That was documented on the EMS refusal form. If his condition changed, I'm sure PD would have called EMS back to the scene or to the lockup/station.

Thank you for weighing in on this subject, ecs.

I'm curious - if you have a patient that you believe may have suffered a closed head injury, then would the fact that they sign a release be sufficient as to relieve you from any liability? What if they are later determined to be suffering from such an injury and subsequently claim they were not competent at the time the release was signed?

 

[crocus]

Walkin about.

Ain't that something?

 

[HiHater]

After all this time? He is hiding, IMO, because new black panthers are after him.

His brother said that his nose was still broken...that was just last week...:twocents::moo:

 

[rbrnmw2]

http://m.yahoo.com/w/news_america/t...r=news.yahoo.com&_intl=us&_lang=en-us&_al=off very good article IMO
:thumbup:
Sent from my Huawei U8800-51 using Tapatalk

 

[crocus]

LOL I shall not be held responsible for whatever I may say before, during, or after commission of said incident.

Unleash the lawyers.....

 

[Allusonz]

He did tell someone that during an interview so I'm guessing it must have been WOFL. However, I put very little faith in anything the Sanford police are saying that they done the night Trayvon was murdered. I, personally, find them to have 0 credibility at this point.

Additionally, like a polygraph, I would imagine that a voice-stress test wouldn't be admissible in court once charges are filed.


~jmo~

Please look at the post I quoted. I was not able to watch this interview. Since the quote has been challenged I would be appreciative if the lawyers did state that in fact the SPD did adminster a voice stress test.

 

[rbrnmw2]

Did you watch Piers Morgan earlier tonight? So far Sonner is making Baez look like a cross between Clarence Darrow and Johnny Cochran.

IMO

My cable and internet have been out for 2 days it's driving me mad can you give me an abridged recap? Preez

Sent from my Huawei U8800-51 using Tapatalk

 

[ecs5298]

Thank you for weighing in on this subject, ecs.

I'm curious - if you have a patient that you believe may have suffered a closed head injury, then would the fact that they sign a release be sufficient as to relieve you from any liability? What if they are later determined to be suffering from such an injury and subsequently claim they were not competent at the time the release was signed?

Here come the caveats....

If at the time of examination, the patient is alert and oriented to person, place and time and you believe they are of sound mind to make competent decisions, you can allow them to refuse (sometimes medical control has to be consulted per local protocols). Here's the caveat....if at any time, you believe that the patient is injured to the extent that a "reasonable person" would seek medical attention and that the injury is potentially life threatening, you can transport them against their will. This is not to be taken lightly. You are taking a persons rights away. Think of this example.....we respond to a report of a "leg injury" and arrive to find that the persons foot has been amputated and they are refusing to go. No reasonable person would not get an amputated foot treated so I can assume that they are incompetent based on their decision to not get treated. The only caveat to that is if their decision is based on religious grounds. Then we just wait until they lose consciousness and transport them under implied consent. Like I said, I have only forced transport a handful of times in 25 years. Usually I can talk them into going. If they are adamant about refusing, I make sure they are made fully aware of the consequences of refusing. Our new electronic charting actually lists them out on the form so they can read them as well as hearing them from me. If they refuse now and crump later, I just hope I've documented it well enough to cover my hiney!

Hope that helps.

 

[MicciStella]

His brother said that his nose was still broken...that was just last week...:twocents::moo:

I really would like to see any PROVE of this...... Anything documented proved by medical examination........

Blessings

Micci

 

[rbrnmw2]

Walkin about.

Don't forget the 'in the rain" part

Sent from my Huawei U8800-51 using Tapatalk

 

[Adrienne37]

http://m.yahoo.com/w/news_america/t...r=news.yahoo.com&_intl=us&_lang=en-us&_al=off very good article IMO
:thumbup:
Sent from my Huawei U8800-51 using Tapatalk

Thanks so much!! This article clears up the misconception that Zimmerman is living in seclusion because the Black Panthers put a bounty on his head because according to his "good buddy" Joe Oliver, he moved out of his apartment and went into seclusion the day after Trayvon's murder.



~jmo~

 

[Velouria]

His brother said that his nose was still broken...that was just last week...:twocents::moo:

Has it been determined that the brother has actually seen GZ since the alleged nose break occurred, or is this what he was told?

 

[highflyer]

Did you watch Piers Morgan earlier tonight? So far Sonner is making Baez look like a cross between Clarence Darrow and Johnny Cochran.

IMO

I did not see it. At least he did not bolt again apparently.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

My sources do not conflict themselves and in fact if you will read the links that were posted, you would see that many states do not allow them to be presented in court period; however, there are several states that do. In the state of Florida, it plainly states if both sides agree they can be used. If one party objects, then it would not be allowed in. Looks like a pretty simple thing to understand if you ask me. Perhaps it would be beneficial if you did your own research on the admissibility of polygraphs in courts and then you can see for yourself exactly what it is you need to know.



~jmo~

I just saw the best case on the ID channel where a LTD was allowed in court. The cops thought they had their guy and gave him a LDT and told him he passed. He kept talking and they found more evidence and ended up charging him for the crime and went to court.

In court he told his lawyer he took a LDT and passed. The lawyer demanded the results be put into the record. LOL LOL the cops had lied to the guy, he failed it all. GUILTY!!:rocker::rocker:

 

[Adrienne37]

Has it been determined that the brother has actually seen GZ since the alleged nose break occurred, or is this what he was told?

Didn't we hear Zimmerman's attorney come out the day after that interview and state that the Zimmerman brothers are estranged and it was like a year since the last time they had spoken? I'm pretty I didn't dream that.



~jmo~

 

[Adrienne37]

I just saw the best case on the ID channel where a LTD was allowed in court. The cops thought they had their guy and gave him a LDT and told him he passed. He kept talking and they found more evidence and ended up charging him for the crime and went to court.

In court he told his lawyer he took a LDT and passed. The lawyer demanded the results be put into the record. LOL LOL the cops had lied to the guy, he failed it all. GUILTY!!:rocker::rocker:

My favorite channel EVER!!



~jmo~

 

[Reader]

He did tell someone that during an interview so I'm guessing it must have been WOFL. However, I put very little faith in anything the Sanford police are saying that they done the night Trayvon was murdered. I, personally, find them to have 0 credibility at this point.

Additionally, like a polygraph, I would imagine that a voice-stress test wouldn't be admissible in court once charges are filed.


~jmo~

Your sources conflict themselves. And it appears that they are allowed in court under certain circumstances. So it would appear that polygraph evidence isn't never allowed in court.

JMO

I don't see the word 'never' in the original response...

 

[frenchvixen]

The public's opinion on whether a crime has been committed isn't as relevant as the criminal justice system's opinion.

Since I don't see any crime was committed, maybe I kind of have myopic vision on this and don't understand where anyone else sees a crime. It's not a crime to disobey a dispatcher's suggestion. It's not a crime to follow someone after you've called LE. It's not a crime to shoot to kill if you're being beaten up. I don't see any crimes here.

Well then why are the feds involved? It's a crime to haunt someone down b/c of their race and instigate them into a fight and then shoot and kill them under the auspices of self defense. That is a violation of his civil rights. < mod snip >