George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #7

[ncgramma]

which is why i want the state to bring up gz's criminal record.

If state brings up GZ's records, defense will be able to bring up Trayvon's past issues too.

 

[barrysgirl]

It's been suggested he fell on the pavement or in the bushes. IMO
There was no evidence of assault on the hands of TBM. IMO

suggested by whom?

 

[gracielee]

Not being snarky but have you heard of a lot of cases where someone is beaten to death in a street fight? No weapons, one on one? With the police on the way?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just reading this discussion, I'm reminded of a recent incident where, wasn't it a kid who slugged someone just after a sporting event/game, one slug, and the guy died? And then there is always the 'hockey dad' who beat the coach guy at a rink in Boston, was it, while the cops were in route.

 

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

That is correct.

1. Rachel Jentel said Trayovn got to just outside his parents Townhouse.

2. Witness Selene S. said she heard 'running left to right', see lives on the same side as Trayvon's dad's fiance's townhouse----which means it had to be Trayvon running from the fiance's townhouse back to the "T-Intersection" near where the confrontation occurred.

3. Zimmerman was getting out of his car and walking up the T-intersection.


So Trayvon had to going back toward the T-section where the confrontation occurred.

Earlier on the 911 tape, Trayvon walked up to the car if we are to believe GZ, but that makes sense, because Trayvon was a HS football player who played wide receiver and once ran a very fast 100-yard dash (less than 10-seconds and he could have easily made it home) and was strong enough to once pull and carry his dad out of a building. Evidence excluded from trial was that Trayvon once bragged about getting the upper hand in a fight by breaking someone's nose. He was not new to fighting or afraid, and in fact, headed back to the confrontation area if we combine Rachels testimony (he was already home) and Selene's testimony (someone was running left to right toward the T-intersection).

Based on evidence and forensics, GZ may have been following and trying to ascertain if Martin 'was from around here', but Trayvon looks like he was looking for a fight.

Something which is not focused on at all. If I were ina similar situation and I was scared and confronted a guy then punched him in the nose and knocked him down, I would have run away and not continue to hit GZ.

 

[Donnareit]

Just a question. Why is it not ok to shoot someone pounding your head into concrete?

Not meaning to be snarky here either, but if it is okay to shoot someone who punches you in the face or pounds your head on the sidewalk, there are going to be a lot more dead people - and a good deal of them will be intimately related with the shooter. :moo: IMO but also based on crime statistics
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4557

Violent Victimization Committed By Strangers, 1993-2010
Erika Harrell, Ph.D.

December 11, 2012 NCJ 239424

Presents findings on the rates and levels of violent victimization committed by offenders who were strangers to the victims, including homicide, rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. The report presents annual trends and compares changes across three 6-year periods in the incidence and type of violence committed by strangers from 1993 through 2010. It describes the characteristics of victims and circumstances of the violent crime. The nonfatal violent victimization estimates were developed from the Bureau of Justice Statistics' National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which collects information on nonfatal crimes, reported and not reported to the police, against persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households. The homicide data are from the FBI's Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) for 1993 through 2008.

Highlights:

In 2010, strangers committed about 38% of nonfatal violent crimes, including rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault.
In 2005-10, about 10% of violent victimizations committed by strangers involved a firearm, compared to 5% committed by offenders known to the victim.
From 1993 to 2008, among homicides reported to the FBI for which the victim-offender relationship was known, between 21% and 27% of homicides were committed by strangers and between 73% and 79% were committed by offenders known to the victims.

 

[nnglas]

suggested by whom?

In that walkthrough video GZ said he may have fell.
IMO

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TexMex]

I was wondering about that. I hope the ME explains whether swelling on TM's hands would be possible after he was shot/had no blood pressure. It's very relevant to GZ's story imo.

I think the ME testimony will be interesting. Especially about the stippling


DR. MICHAEL ARNALL, BOARD CERTIFIED FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Yes, I do.

GRACE: Explain.

ARNALL: There is a cone of powder and soot that comes out of a gun when it`s fired. If the T-shirt and the sweatshirt that do have holes in them were adjacent to the skin when the gun was discharged, the soot and powder particles would be screened off of the body by the fabric. What they`re saying is, that because there is stippling, that is to say, powder particles in a little two-inch by two-inch pattern around the hole --

GRACE: Yes.

ARNALL: -- then the fabric could not have been against the skin at the time the gun was discharged, but that the fabric must have been lying against the barrel of the gun when it was discharged, so that expanding cone of powder and particles put impact upon the skin. They`re saying that that had to have been the two or three or four inches away from the skin to cause that stippling pattern that you have seen on the autopsy.

GRACE: Got it. Dr. Michael Arnall, do you agree with the theory?

ARNALL: When I first read the autopsy report, I couldn`t -- I figured the doctor must have made a mistake because you can`t get stippling through the fabric. When I understood what they`re arguing, I believe that`s the only possible explanation for finding that stippling pattern against the skin.

GRACE: And that explanation is what, Dr. Arnall?

ARNALL: That the fabric must have been two or three or four inches off of the skin when the gun was discharged. And they`re arguing that the only reason the fabric would be off of the skin would be if the individual was on top, and the fabric was passively away from the skin because of gravity.

GRACE: And Dr. Arnall, would you get the same result if Trayvon Martin had been on the bottom, and in the fight, the grappling back and forth, the hoodie was lifted up off the skin at the time of the gunshot wound? That way the skin would not be touching the hoodie -- although the victim would be on the bottom?

ARNALL: It would have to be both the hoodie and the T-shirt underneath. Both those pieces of fabric.

 

[Lovelymountains]

It happens more often than you think.. They don't all get publicity.

I just always want to make sure if we are putting someone in jail for murder, we can PROVE they committed murder.

Oh I thought you meant you had some special knowledge on the subject. Sorry. But I think we all want to be sure that someone who is found guilty of murder, is indeed guilty. We just have differing opinions on who is guilty and who is the victim and reasons for those opinions. IMO

 

[Jane Jetson]

Well there's more to it than that though. TM attacked GZ imo. He didn't just see TM and decide to start shooting.

Not only that - George also was insistent that he meet with a police officer. That is not, imo, the action of someone who wants to commit a vigilante-type act. The police would be the last people he'd want to see. :twocents:

 

[gracielee]

Wow states are different, it is next to impossible to get a concealed carry permit in NJ.

Not in N.C., you take a course, pass a test, and you get a CCP. When I voiced concern to a deputy about walking my dogs in our rural area, outside city limits, I was advised as long as I didn't conceal my weapon, I should just strap on a holster and wear it when I walk. My concern was about loose, possibly aggressive pit bull type dogs attacking me or my dogs.

 

[Trident]

IMO GZ wouldn't have been clear and awake if TM had suceeded in killing him, which is what I believe TM was trying to do. The photos of GZ's injuries IMO DO "point to that."

I'm still waiting for someone to explain why a high school football player couldn't have run away from GZ and reached the apartment.

Maybe because he didn't want to - maybe he had other things he wanted to do, like talk on the phone to that person who testified?

My opinion only

 

[Donnareit]

Something which is not focused on at all. If I were ina similar situation and I was scared and confronted a guy then punched him in the nose and knocked him down, I would have run away and not continue to hit GZ.

Unless they had a hold on your clothes.

 

[Donnareit]

Not only that - George also was insistent that he meet with a police officer. That is not, imo, the action of someone who wants to commit a vigilante-type act. The police would be the last people he'd want to see. :twocents:

Unless he thought the police would back him up. :twocents:

 

[qwerty2013]

IMHO, the trial for M2 hinges on a key factor - that Z killed TM out of fear for his own life.

First, the evidence - injuries were not at all life-threatening or serious enough to require a visit to the hospital, Z was able to walk around unassisted and talked coherently after this "lethal beating".

This shows that physically and in reality, Z was not in any danger that night. I know some have argued that the injuries might not LOOK serious but could be in fact serious, but this would be conjecture and speculation, and needs to be backed up by medical documentation that indicates that the injuries were much worse than they appeared.

The argument - that it didn't matter if Z was actually in physical danger, if he acted out of a belief in his own physical danger - would then be valid if the following were true:

1. The fight was prolonged even if the physical blows were minor. However, the fight lasted under 2 minutes, i.e. 2 minutes of light blows (since the injuries sustained indicated they were light blows). This was a very short fight.

2. Z himself was physically very much inferior to TM.

Z practiced MMA 3 times a week at that time, surely he was in relatively good shape ( as evident in his photos and videos from that night) and has been in fights far longer than 2 minutes during his training. In other words, he was TRAINING TO FIGHT, so a 2 minutes fight consisting of light blows could not have been too much to endure.

3. Z is easily terrified and fearful.

As the volunteer Captain of the NW, Z logically cannot be someone who is easily spooked or afraid for his own life if he has been following burglars and suspects at night. Most of all, Z was packing a lethal weapon that could kill at that time. The fact that he went after TM showed he wasn't in a state of fear psychologically, even though he thought TM might be on drugs and armed. If he were, he would have stayed in his truck and let the far superior in force and numbers LE handle TM.

IMHO, Z was more like a trained fighter pitbull than a cowering chihuahua.

Since his injuries were proven to be minor, I can't think of any other reasons that would cause Z to fear for his life there and then that could cause him to use his lethal weapon to kill TM.

Another issue that causes me consternation is the rampant speculation that TM COULD be a someday if not that fateful evening that ended his life, with an iced tea in his pocket and a bag of skittles he was buying for the younger child he was minding. Does this imply that since TM *MIGHT* be a someday he therefore deserved somehow to be viewed under the lens today as a potential ?

I just can't describe how this sends chills down my spine...this was what killed TM ultimately, that he *looked* like he could be a to someone like Z, NOT that he *was* one.

My own two cents.

 

[NancyGracesBangs]

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2013/05/trayvon-martin-character-evidence-or-character-assassination/


Good link to information on Florida law regarding the conduct admissibility, etc. of both involved.

 

[Lovelymountains]

I think the ME testimony will be interesting. Especially about the stippling


DR. MICHAEL ARNALL, BOARD CERTIFIED FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Yes, I do.

GRACE: Explain.

ARNALL: There is a cone of powder and soot that comes out of a gun when it`s fired. If the T-shirt and the sweatshirt that do have holes in them were adjacent to the skin when the gun was discharged, the soot and powder particles would be screened off of the body by the fabric. What they`re saying is, that because there is stippling, that is to say, powder particles in a little two-inch by two-inch pattern around the hole --

GRACE: Yes.

ARNALL: -- then the fabric could not have been against the skin at the time the gun was discharged, but that the fabric must have been lying against the barrel of the gun when it was discharged, so that expanding cone of powder and particles put impact upon the skin. They`re saying that that had to have been the two or three or four inches away from the skin to cause that stippling pattern that you have seen on the autopsy.

GRACE: Got it. Dr. Michael Arnall, do you agree with the theory?

ARNALL: When I first read the autopsy report, I couldn`t -- I figured the doctor must have made a mistake because you can`t get stippling through the fabric. When I understood what they`re arguing, I believe that`s the only possible explanation for finding that stippling pattern against the skin.

GRACE: And that explanation is what, Dr. Arnall?

ARNALL: That the fabric must have been two or three or four inches off of the skin when the gun was discharged. And they`re arguing that the only reason the fabric would be off of the skin would be if the individual was on top, and the fabric was passively away from the skin because of gravity.

GRACE: And Dr. Arnall, would you get the same result if Trayvon Martin had been on the bottom, and in the fight, the grappling back and forth, the hoodie was lifted up off the skin at the time of the gunshot wound? That way the skin would not be touching the hoodie -- although the victim would be on the bottom?

ARNALL: It would have to be both the hoodie and the T-shirt underneath. Both those pieces of fabric.

I think that is interesting but I'm wondering whether or not the fabric of both articles of clothing would not be forced against the skin by the bullet striking the clothing first. I don't know. Just wondering. IMO

 

[ncgramma]

Wow states are different, it is next to impossible to get a concealed carry permit in NJ.

I lived in New Jersey for 15 years. Moved up there from Virginia. Brought my husbands firearms with us during the move. You wouldn't believe all the NJ laws we broke ... which we found out later when we went in to register the batch. My DH walked in 6'3" and I watched him shrink to 6'. LOL They were very understanding and helpful back then. Don't even want to think what would have happened if it was now. LOL

 

[Just K]

IMO, Mr Osterman is full of literary license and definitely using emotion and further embellishment. Rather than repeating what GZ told him, he adds his personal commentary as to his own experience. For reference please refer to Mr Osterman's testimony.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

It's been suggested he fell on the pavement or in the bushes. IMO
There was no evidence of assault on the hands of TBM. IMO

Actually there is eye witness testimony that puts TM on top of GZ beating him. That is not from GZ but testimony from a bystander.

So there is proof that TM beat GZ in some way. He did not have the injuries before the encounter and after he does.

That is proof OMO.

 

[Just K]

Shelly sounds like a saint per Mr Osterman