George Zimmerman's bloody head

[Intense]

It was taken three minutes after the shot was fired.

That is, JUST three minutes.

To think this was part of some coverup is almost as imbecilic as the twoofers theory that orbs took down the twin towers.

Bulls-eye.

 

[Intense]

Class!!!..... Class!!!..... Pay attention now Class!!!!!.......

 

[KissMy]

It looks superficial, not a wound produced by someone's head being repeatedly bashed against concrete.

You are wrong.

In 30 plus years of treating wounds of all types, I see wounds on ZMan that could be caused by the head being bashed against concrete. If someone sucker-punched me and commenced to dribble my cranium on the sidewalk, I would put hollowpoints center of mass.

I am anxious to see the postmortum report which hopefully will describe the angle of entry of the bullet and distance of the shooter, etc.

I bet the jury will be interested in that as well.

Getting your nose busted & head bashed on concrete will usually knock you out before it causes a gash.

During the bail hearing the investigator said that the gunshot was "near contact" on Martins hoodie. Witness said "the gunpowder burns on Martin's gray hoodie were clearly visible." Martins mortician said there was no exit wound, suggesting the gunshot was at an angle. (likely up-wards angle)

George Zimmerman bond hearing VIDEO at time 1:48:20 in video.

Judge?: "Any evidence with respect to how far the individuals were from each-other when shot was fired?"

Detective Gilbreath: "It was close proximity. There were powder burns on the sweatshirt. Near contact on that and there was also stippling on Martin indicating it was close proximity."

ABC: George Zimmerman Tells Trayvon Martin's Parents 'I Am Sorry' - "The person who took the photograph of a bloodied Zimmerman, asking not to be identified, told ABC News exclusively that they did not see the scuffle that night, but did hear it. The person recalled seeing Martin's prostrate body on the wet grass and said the gunpowder burns on Martin's gray hoodie were clearly visible."

The photo is admissible as evidence in court. It was taken by a witness who heard the scuffle. The photos encrypted GPS data proves it was taken by the witness's smart phone 3 minutes after the shooting at the location of the scuffle.

 

[syrenn]

But why? He didn't commit a crime, and unless he was being annoying or posed as a threat to the people around him being on drugs is not a crime. Possessing drugs is, being public intoxicated is not unless you pose as a danger to yourself or others around you. Giving the fact Martin alone, if he was on drugs, he was not committing a crime.

You don't have to be committing a crime to look suspicious.

Zimmerman implied that Travon might be in the process of committing a crime when he said these punks always get away. Some people say he said something racist other than punks.

He is really talking a lot and digging himself in deeper. Corey is going to be all over him just with the stuff he's already said. Apologizing to the family at the bail hearing for one.

I listened to the tape..and i hear punks. In my opinion the comment about the punks getting away is about correct. I did not hear anything about him saying he saw him commenting a crime... he said he was suspicious.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Who cares what Doucheowitz thinks?

 

[Sarah G]

You don't have to be committing a crime to look suspicious.

Zimmerman implied that Travon might be in the process of committing a crime when he said these punks always get away. Some people say he said something racist other than punks.

He is really talking a lot and digging himself in deeper. Corey is going to be all over him just with the stuff he's already said. Apologizing to the family at the bail hearing for one.

I listened to the tape..and i hear punks. In my opinion the comment about the punks getting away is about correct. I did not hear anything about him saying he saw him commenting a crime... he said he was suspicious.

Why would he call him a punk and say they always get away when he didn't know anything about Travon. He was profiling him. He actually said these punks (or whatever) always get away.

What was Travon getting away with? He was just walking down the street.

That's why Zimmerman kept following him and finally stopped him, imo. He didn't want that punk getting away.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Zimmerman implied that Travon might be in the process of committing a crime when he said these punks always get away. Some people say he said something racist other than punks.

He is really talking a lot and digging himself in deeper. Corey is going to be all over him just with the stuff he's already said. Apologizing to the family at the bail hearing for one.

I listened to the tape..and i hear punks. In my opinion the comment about the punks getting away is about correct. I did not hear anything about him saying he saw him commenting a crime... he said he was suspicious.

Why would he call him a punk and say they always get away when he didn't know anything about Travon. He was profiling him. He actually said these punks (or whatever) always get away.

What was Travon getting away with? He was just walking down the street.

That's why Zimmerman kept following him and finally stopped him, imo. He didn't want that punk getting away.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after the police dispatcher said he didn't have to. In fact, at the bond hearing the state investigator admitted there is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that he turned back towards his car after talking to the dispatcher.

 

[syrenn]

Zimmerman implied that Travon might be in the process of committing a crime when he said these punks always get away. Some people say he said something racist other than punks.

He is really talking a lot and digging himself in deeper. Corey is going to be all over him just with the stuff he's already said. Apologizing to the family at the bail hearing for one.

I listened to the tape..and i hear punks. In my opinion the comment about the punks getting away is about correct. I did not hear anything about him saying he saw him commenting a crime... he said he was suspicious.

Why would he call him a punk and say they always get away when he didn't know anything about Travon. He was profiling him. He actually said these punks (or whatever) always get away.

What was Travon getting away with? He was just walking down the street.

That's why Zimmerman kept following him and finally stopped him, imo. He didn't want that punk getting away.

All kids are punks... And i understand the feeling...in my opinion they always get away too. I don't think the statement had anything to do with martin.... but young punks in general.

As far as i see it...zimmerman followed him to make sure he did not do anything criminal.... or did not break any laws.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

She testified to Martin saying Zimmerman came back, not the other way around. I guess Martin told her. The dropped call was five minutes before the Police go there. How long do you think it would take for Martin to circle back around, attack Zimmerman, and for the Police to get there?

You guys are sure quick to believe Zimmerman who is the only one saying Martin came after him, while there is actually a witness to back up that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin. Zimmerman has a history of assault, Martin does not.
I am still trying to figure out why you guys are quick to accept Zimmerman's account without witnesses, but not Martin's who's girlfriend has testified to Martin saying Zimmerman was the one who actually followed him.

Tell Me dildo, why do you believe Zimmerman over Martin and Martin's girlfriend?

Could it be that Zimmerman went back to his car and found Martin walking around it?

That would explain everything, unless you already have all the facts.

When did Martin go back to the truck and circle it between 7:16 and 7:17?
And why are you guys so quick to believe Zimmerman? Is it only because the liberals have sided with Martin?

Maybe he wanted to use it to get away from the guy that was chasing him with a gun.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I listened to the tape..and i hear punks. In my opinion the comment about the punks getting away is about correct. I did not hear anything about him saying he saw him commenting a crime... he said he was suspicious.

Why would he call him a punk and say they always get away when he didn't know anything about Travon. He was profiling him. He actually said these punks (or whatever) always get away.

What was Travon getting away with? He was just walking down the street.

That's why Zimmerman kept following him and finally stopped him, imo. He didn't want that punk getting away.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after the police dispatcher said he didn't have to. In fact, at the bond hearing the state investigator admitted there is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that he turned back towards his car after talking to the dispatcher.

As to the first claim, that there is no evidence Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after the police dispatcher said he shouldn't, there is...

Dispatcher Call ~~ 19:11
Girlfriend Inbound Call ~~ 19:12
Zimmerman Exits Truck ~~ + 2 minutes 10 seconds
Zimmerman Acknowledges Dispatcher Instruction Not To Follow ~~ +2 minutes 28 seconds
Dispatcher Call Ends ~~ 19:15
Girlfriend Call Ends ~~ 19:16

Examining the recording, the time from exiting the truck to acknowledging the dispatcher instructions was 18 seconds.

To claim Zimmerman was returning to his truck at the point he acknowledges the dispatcher with "OK", that would have occurred at approximately time 19:13:28. The girlfriends call ended at approximately 19:16 based on phone records (call time + duration). The difference is approximately 2 minutes 30 seconds to return to the truck, when traveling away from the truck for 18 seconds. From the truck's likely location (based on Zimmerman's description of the location in the dispatcher tape) the truck was likely about 150 yards away from the shooting site. **IF** he began returning at the "OK" acknowledgment he'd have had 833.3% more time to return (2:30) then the 18 seconds traveling away.


>>>>

 

[Ariux]

Who cares what Doucheowitz thinks?

Right. Who cares what a Jew thinks... Doucheowitz's comments reflect his instinct to defend criminals. It's a coincidence that Zimmerman is innocent.

 

[dilloduck]

Zimmerman implied that Travon might be in the process of committing a crime when he said these punks always get away. Some people say he said something racist other than punks.

He is really talking a lot and digging himself in deeper. Corey is going to be all over him just with the stuff he's already said. Apologizing to the family at the bail hearing for one.

I listened to the tape..and i hear punks. In my opinion the comment about the punks getting away is about correct. I did not hear anything about him saying he saw him commenting a crime... he said he was suspicious.

Why would he call him a punk and say they always get away when he didn't know anything about Travon. He was profiling him. He actually said these punks (or whatever) always get away.

What was Travon getting away with? He was just walking down the street.

That's why Zimmerman kept following him and finally stopped him, imo. He didn't want that punk getting away.

I don't hear the National Association for the Protection of Punks bitching.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Who cares what Doucheowitz thinks?

Right. Who cares what a Jew thinks... Doucheowitz's comments reflect his instinct to defend criminals. It's a coincidence that Zimmerman is innocent.

You have no idea if Zimmerman is innocent or guilty.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He was on the phone with his girlfriend until Zimmerman got out of his car and approached him then she said the phone was somehow dropped.

She was a witness until that moment. This self defense theory is Ludicrous. So is the stand your ground theory in this case.

Yep, Zimmerman walked up to Martin and attacked him with the back of his head.

Funny thing, the only people I see who mention stand your ground are the idiots who think Zimmerman is guilty. I have repeatedly pointed out that, even without stand your ground, Zimmerman had a right to defend himself if Martin was on top of him and he couldn't get away. That applies in every single state in this country.

That is not true in all cases. Under Florida Statute 776.041 (use of force by an aggressor) negates the self defense claim if Zimmerman was the aggressor and (a) was committing a forcible felony, OR (b) they fear death or great bodily harm and did not take reasonable steps to escape the situation.

Under the first clause, if it can be shown that Zimmerman initiated hostilities, then you possibly have assault and and unlawful detention which is defined in 776.08 as a forcible felony. Under the second set of circumstances the state will likely make the case that Zimmerman did not take advantage of an escape from the situation because he left his truck and intruded himself into a situation where he'd been specifically instructed as a member of the Neighborhood watch not to go.


>>>>

Not true. Even if Zimmerman started the fight, which there is no evidence of, if Martin reacted in such a way as to put him in fear of his life, then Zimmerman has a right to defend himself. There was a case in Wisconsin, which is hardly a mecca for right wingers, where a guy kicked in the door at a neighbor's house to break up a loud party. One of the underage kids ran away from the crazy guy breaking down doors, and hid on the porch of the very guy he was running from, and was killed when he came back. He argued in court that he was defending his family, even though he admitted he was responsible for the initial confrontation, and won.

People want to think that who started the fight makes a difference, but the only way it would is if the state could provide proof that Zimmerman both started the fight, and that Martin did not pose a threat to him in the ensuing fight. That is a really high hurdle.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, a real live witness.

Eye Witness: "Police REFUSED to see Crime Scene in Trayvon Martin Case".mp4 - YouTube

About 5:30 on the video.

Worthless---he says himself that he didn't see anything clearly enough to testify to.

NO, She (the witness) clearly says that the larger man was on top, the shot was fired, then the larger man (the same one that was on tip) rose and walked into better light.

I think we can all agree that the one that did not rise was Martin.


>>>>

You, quite obviously, did not listen to the interview.

 

[dilloduck]

No, a real live witness.

Eye Witness: "Police REFUSED to see Crime Scene in Trayvon Martin Case".mp4 - YouTube

About 5:30 on the video.

Worthless---he says himself that he didn't see anything clearly enough to testify to.

He/she saw a larger man on top at the time of the shooting. Clearly.

It's like you weren't even listening to the words.

Clearly ? It was dark. At 6:19 the eyewitness said he/she couldn't see clearly enough to testify.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yep, Zimmerman walked up to Martin and attacked him with the back of his head.

Funny thing, the only people I see who mention stand your ground are the idiots who think Zimmerman is guilty. I have repeatedly pointed out that, even without stand your ground, Zimmerman had a right to defend himself if Martin was on top of him and he couldn't get away. That applies in every single state in this country.

That is not true in all cases. Under Florida Statute 776.041 (use of force by an aggressor) negates the self defense claim if Zimmerman was the aggressor and (a) was committing a forcible felony, OR (b) they fear death or great bodily harm and did not take reasonable steps to escape the situation.

Under the first clause, if it can be shown that Zimmerman initiated hostilities, then you possibly have assault and and unlawful detention which is defined in 776.08 as a forcible felony. Under the second set of circumstances the state will likely make the case that Zimmerman did not take advantage of an escape from the situation because he left his truck and intruded himself into a situation where he'd been specifically instructed as a member of the Neighborhood watch not to go.


>>>>

Not true. Even if Zimmerman started the fight, which there is no evidence of, if Martin reacted in such a way as to put him in fear of his life, then Zimmerman has a right to defend himself.

I didn't say Zimmerman didn't have a right to defend himself, what is true is that under Florida Law (Statute 776.041) **IF** Zimmerman was the aggressor and was found to be in the commission of a forcible felony, then Zimmerman would not qualify under the Self Defense statutes from immunity from prosecution and a determination of justifiable homicide. A subtle but important distinction.

There was a case in Wisconsin, which is hardly a mecca for right wingers, where a guy kicked in the door at a neighbor's house to break up a loud party. One of the underage kids ran away from the crazy guy breaking down doors, and hid on the porch of the very guy he was running from, and was killed when he came back. He argued in court that he was defending his family, even though he admitted he was responsible for the initial confrontation, and won.

This case will be argued under Florida law, not Wisconsin law and I've noted the applicable statutes under Florida Law (776.041) which specifically notes that self defense IS NOT a defense when certain conditions apply and I noted them.

People want to think that who started the fight makes a difference, but the only way it would is if the state could provide proof that Zimmerman both started the fight, and that Martin did not pose a threat to him in the ensuing fight. That is a really high hurdle.

I didn't say that the State didn't have a burden of proof to show the conditions existed which nullifies the affirmative defense of - well - self defense.

I was simply pointing out that under Florida law there are certain conditions were if you are identified as the aggressor and the hostilities escalate to the point where you - as the aggressor - fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, that you are not exempt from prosecution under the guise of "Self Defense" if someone uses force in return because you have created a situation where the non-aggressor fears death or great bodily harm.


Sorry, that's Florida Law.

>>>>

 

[paperview]

...
As to the first claim, that there is no evidence Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after the police dispatcher said he shouldn't, there is...

Dispatcher Call ~~ 19:11
Girlfriend Inbound Call ~~ 19:12
Zimmerman Exits Truck ~~ + 2 minutes 10 seconds
Zimmerman Acknowledges Dispatcher Instruction Not To Follow ~~ +2 minutes 28 seconds
Dispatcher Call Ends ~~ 19:15
Girlfriend Call Ends ~~ 19:16

Examining the recording, the time from exiting the truck to acknowledging the dispatcher instructions was 18 seconds.

To claim Zimmerman was returning to his truck at the point he acknowledges the dispatcher with "OK", that would have occurred at approximately time 19:13:28. The girlfriends call ended at approximately 19:16 based on phone records (call time + duration). The difference is approximately 2 minutes 30 seconds to return to the truck, when traveling away from the truck for 18 seconds. From the truck's likely location (based on Zimmerman's description of the location in the dispatcher tape) the truck was likely about 150 yards away from the shooting site. **IF** he began returning at the "OK" acknowledgment he'd have had 833.3% more time to return (2:30) then the 18 seconds traveling away.


>>>>

Hey, WW. (you'll be proud of me for this)

This is not related to your post, per se, but I know how you, like me, like to have the details in order, and available for use.

I have searched in vain to find the portion of the transcript where they broke away to commercial and important testimony was covered. None.

Anywhere. I even looked for small portions of a dozen sentences to see if I could find it anywhere. argh. So, obsessed with getting the facts out, silly lil me, just took some bloody freakin time to transcribe a portion of it. (the part about TM "circling" Z's car has not been transcribed yet, or the introduction of the two flashlights found on Zimmerman. That's next.)

But here, (I think I can claim to be the first with this.

Portion not yet transcribed - anywhere - but here at USBM. (I think it's important)

DE LA RIONDA: Mr. Zimmerman never claimed that he chased - in terms of 'ran after - Mr. Martin?

GILBREATH: No.

DE LA RIONDA: But you still have, is it not true, a witness who describes someone chasing another person from the area where they ended up... in other words, from where, near where Mr. Martin lived to the area where the murder happened?

GILBREATH: Yes.
... ...
O'MARA; You had mentioned, the prosecutor had questioned you about Mr. Zimmerman saying that he was having his head hit on the back, correct?

GILBREATH:Yes.

O'MARA; I thought you said the evidence was inconsistent with that?

GILBREATH: No, I don't believe that was his question.

O'MARA; Oh, then let me ask you. Is the evidence inconstant with the suggestion by Mr. Zimmerman that he was his having his head hit or bashed on the ground?

GILBREATH: His injuries are consistent with trauma to the back of his head, yes.

O'MARA;Ok. What are those injuries?

GILBREATH: There's two lacerations to the back of his head

O'MARA; OK. Did you identify what caused those lacerations?

GILBREATH: No.

O'MARA: Could it have been having his head bashed on the ground as he testified to?

GILBREATH: He suggested, I don't know about testified to, he mentioned that his head was being physically bashed against the concrete sidewalk, and that he...this was just prior to him firing the shot, and that he managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk, and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found."

From the video testimony here: George Zimmerman bond hearing :: WRAL.com

ETA: starts at 1:47 (this portion)

 

[WorldWatcher]

Worthless---he says himself that he didn't see anything clearly enough to testify to.

NO, She (the witness) clearly says that the larger man was on top, the shot was fired, then the larger man (the same one that was on tip) rose and walked into better light.

I think we can all agree that the one that did not rise was Martin.


>>>>

You, quite obviously, did not listen to the interview.

Quite obviously I did. She said the larger man was on top. She said the boy was on the bottom. She said she was watching during the time the gunshot was heard. She said the larger man rose and walked into better light. We now know the larger man was Zimmerman because it is unlikely that Martin got up off the ground.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Worthless---he says himself that he didn't see anything clearly enough to testify to.

He/she saw a larger man on top at the time of the shooting. Clearly.

It's like you weren't even listening to the words.

Clearly ? It was dark. At 6:19 the eyewitness said he/she couldn't see clearly enough to testify.

That's not what the witness said.

Let's look at what was said in context of the preceding questions:

• (Start Time ~6:00)
• Reporter (6:00): When you first saw him coming towards you could you see any blood on his face? Was it light enough for you to be able to see any blood on his face if their was any there?
• Witness (6:10): It was not light enough for me to see if there was any blood on the face.
• Reporter: So there could have been, it was just not something you could testify to?
• Witness (6:17): No I could not testify because I could not see
• Reporter (6:20): Did he say anything?
• Witness (6:24): There was a man that came out with a flashlight who was a resident, and ah they possibly were saying something to each other but I could not hear what the words were.
• (End Time ~6:36)

Clearly the answer at 6:17 is to the question about seeing blood on the fact.

>>>>