Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Jury selection drags into Day 5 in George Zimmerman murder trial | News - Home
M O'M live statement on now.
Jury selection drags into Day 5 in George Zimmerman murder trial | News - Home
M O'M live statement on now.
Why are media using the term "drags"? This is normal in a sensational case.
'
I think it is utterly repulsive that so many people regard this trial as entertainment.
.
'
I think it is utterly repulsive that so many people regard this trial as entertainment.
.
:
It is also repulsive that you think you have some claim to being the judge of the attitudes and behaviors of so many other people when you are such a dill-weed twerp.
,
the lab called it a contact shot
http://cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/FDLE-Lab-report.pdf
http://cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/FDLE-Lab-report.pdf AT pdf page 19 of 21. The analysis report says that the residue and physical effects were "consistent with" a contact shot.
I find that ^ pretty compelling.
Since it only says "consistent with," there is a pretty fair chance that the prosecution will seek to parse that finding. But, I doubt they will press it too far. A pretty good set of underlying scientific bases exist for the scientific conclusion reported; and I suspect that the prosecutor will not want to highlight the essentially inescapable conclusion.
It is highly significant scientific/forensic physical evidence for the defense, though.
It AT LEAST corroborates Zimmerman's account and does nothing to support any other view of the evidence. Zimmerman didn't light the kid up from a distance. With the wound evidence on Zimmerman, the grass evidence on Martin's pants and Zimmerman's jacket, and with the close contact nature of the gunshot, it is really not reasonable to believe anything other than that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman at the moment Zimmerman fired the shot. Plus, it also looks damn likely that Zimmerman was getting a beat down.
The defense of "justification" looks strong.
That's kind of presumptuous. The stippling and ME's report shows only that the muzzle of the weapon was very close to Martin's chest at the time it was fired. Being either in direct contract or in the 4-6 inch range. That is it, it does not confirm Zimmerman's story and there is actually another reasonable explanation that fit's all the evidence.
Evidence:
1. Martin's wound showing close proximity of the muzzle.
2. Zimmerman having GSR on his hands.
3. Zimmerman not having GSR on the front of his jacket or sleeves.
4. Zimmerman not having any Martin DNA for blood evidencec on the front of his jacket.
5. The trajectory of the bullet path being perpendicular to the plan of Martin's chest (in other words a straight in shot.)
6. Grass stains on Zimmerman's knees.
7. No grass stains on Zimmerman's jacket (IIRC, there we no stains on Zimmerman's jacket, it was Ofc. Smith (first resonder) that had in his report that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had grass on it, having grass on it and having grass stains are two different things.)
Zimmerman's Story:
1. Zimmerman was on the ground at the time the weapons was discharged.
2. Martin was on top of him "whaling" (yes he used that term in the audio tapes) on Zimmerman's face, eventually they struggled for the gun which means Martin was bent over Zimmerman while being on top.
Scenerio #1:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top bent over trying to get control of a firearm. The person on the bottom shoots the person in the chest, the person dies and the person on the bottom rolls the dead body off.
Scenerio #2:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top. The person on top has had enough and tries to get off OR the person on the bottom gains enough leverage to push the person on top off. During body separation the person that was on the bottom draws his weapon, extends his arm, points the weapon a the center of mass of the person that was on top and pulls the trigger.
Issues:
1. When a firearm is discharge it generates GSR which exists the muzzle (contributing to the stippling of the skin (due to close proximity) but is also expelled out the ejection port (on a semi-automatic). With two bodies close together, no GSR was found on Zimmerman (except for his hands) indicative that his arm was extended way from his body. But with the chests of both parties close together, the shooters arm would have extended through the other body.
2. With the chests close together and Martin over Zimmerman, there was no blood evidence transferred to Zimmerman jacket.
3. The trajectory of the bullet being perpendicular to the plan of the chest would be difficult and unnatural to achieve for two reasons: (1) Zimmerman would have had to draw the weapon and maneuver it between the struggling bodies, and (2) he describes he and Martin struggling for the weapon. So a perpendicular chest shot under those conditions? I'd like to see some expert testimony on that.
Scenario #2 is actually a more logical possibility given the available evidence then is scenario #1. Now this would depend on witnesses that actually were looking at the scene at the exact time of the shooting and can confirm the muzzle flashes occurred when Martin was on top. If that is the case, then scenario #2 is eliminated, but my recollection is that the neighbors were not on scene when the weapon was fired.
>>>>
'
I think it is utterly repulsive that so many people regard this trial as entertainment.
.
:
It is also repulsive that you think you have some claim to being the judge of the attitudes and behaviors of so many other people when you are such a dill-weed twerp.
,
Aren't we all just offering our opinions on the matter, all of whom should be allowed to do so without the name calling.
:
It is also repulsive that you think you have some claim to being the judge of the attitudes and behaviors of so many other people when you are such a dill-weed twerp.
,
Aren't we all just offering our opinions on the matter, all of whom should be allowed to do so without the name calling.
Since not one of us is on the jury and none of us has seen the actual evidence or had any part of it tested via cross examination, it is absolutely true that we are offering not just "opinions" but opinions in pretty much of a vacuum.
And it is just plain hypocrisy and effete snobbery of a douche-maggot like noman to worry about others viewing any of this as "entertainment." Why do crime fiction shows and novels sell? Because there IS an element of entertainment in these kind of puzzles.
If it were not open to any doubt, there'd be nothing worth discussing. But the fact that there is some doubt makes the whole "mystery" something that does pack some element of entertainment.
Why pretend otherwise?
Despite that, I sure hope that justice gets done rather than just a "show."
i just want a fair trial
hopefully those wanting on the jury with an agenda
will be weeded out
http://cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/FDLE-Lab-report.pdf AT pdf page 19 of 21. The analysis report says that the residue and physical effects were "consistent with" a contact shot.
I find that ^ pretty compelling.
Since it only says "consistent with," there is a pretty fair chance that the prosecution will seek to parse that finding. But, I doubt they will press it too far. A pretty good set of underlying scientific bases exist for the scientific conclusion reported; and I suspect that the prosecutor will not want to highlight the essentially inescapable conclusion.
It is highly significant scientific/forensic physical evidence for the defense, though.
It AT LEAST corroborates Zimmerman's account and does nothing to support any other view of the evidence. Zimmerman didn't light the kid up from a distance. With the wound evidence on Zimmerman, the grass evidence on Martin's pants and Zimmerman's jacket, and with the close contact nature of the gunshot, it is really not reasonable to believe anything other than that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman at the moment Zimmerman fired the shot. Plus, it also looks damn likely that Zimmerman was getting a beat down.
The defense of "justification" looks strong.
That's kind of presumptuous. The stippling and ME's report shows only that the muzzle of the weapon was very close to Martin's chest at the time it was fired. Being either in direct contract or in the 4-6 inch range. That is it, it does not confirm Zimmerman's story and there is actually another reasonable explanation that fit's all the evidence.
Evidence:
1. Martin's wound showing close proximity of the muzzle.
2. Zimmerman having GSR on his hands.
3. Zimmerman not having GSR on the front of his jacket or sleeves.
4. Zimmerman not having any Martin DNA for blood evidencec on the front of his jacket.
5. The trajectory of the bullet path being perpendicular to the plan of Martin's chest (in other words a straight in shot.)
6. Grass stains on Zimmerman's knees.
7. No grass stains on Zimmerman's jacket (IIRC, there we no stains on Zimmerman's jacket, it was Ofc. Smith (first resonder) that had in his report that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had grass on it, having grass on it and having grass stains are two different things.)
Zimmerman's Story:
1. Zimmerman was on the ground at the time the weapons was discharged.
2. Martin was on top of him "whaling" (yes he used that term in the audio tapes) on Zimmerman's face, eventually they struggled for the gun which means Martin was bent over Zimmerman while being on top.
Scenerio #1:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top bent over trying to get control of a firearm. The person on the bottom shoots the person in the chest, the person dies and the person on the bottom rolls the dead body off.
Scenerio #2:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top. The person on top has had enough and tries to get off OR the person on the bottom gains enough leverage to push the person on top off. During body separation the person that was on the bottom draws his weapon, extends his arm, points the weapon a the center of mass of the person that was on top and pulls the trigger.
Issues:
1. When a firearm is discharge it generates GSR which exists the muzzle (contributing to the stippling of the skin (due to close proximity) but is also expelled out the ejection port (on a semi-automatic). With two bodies close together, no GSR was found on Zimmerman (except for his hands) indicative that his arm was extended way from his body. But with the chests of both parties close together, the shooters arm would have extended through the other body.
2. With the chests close together and Martin over Zimmerman, there was no blood evidence transferred to Zimmerman jacket.
3. The trajectory of the bullet being perpendicular to the plan of the chest would be difficult and unnatural to achieve for two reasons: (1) Zimmerman would have had to draw the weapon and maneuver it between the struggling bodies, and (2) he describes he and Martin struggling for the weapon. So a perpendicular chest shot under those conditions? I'd like to see some expert testimony on that.
Scenario #2 is actually a more logical possibility given the available evidence then is scenario #1. Now this would depend on witnesses that actually were looking at the scene at the exact time of the shooting and can confirm the muzzle flashes occurred when Martin was on top. If that is the case, then scenario #2 is eliminated, but my recollection is that the neighbors were not on scene when the weapon was fired.
>>>>
What a fantasy based set of musings.
Nope.
The wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head are consistent with his account.
The busted nose is consistent with his account.
The grass on HIS back is consistent with HIS account.
the grass stains on the knees of Trayvon Martin's pants is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
The close contact wound is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
And you have no support for your weird-ass claim about the "trajectory" of the bullet wound. If you could EVER get a real expert to describe the mechanism for a bullet's path and direction inside of a body as it was engaged in some kind of struggle with the shooter, you'd be one unique advocate. Most experts worth their CV would trip over themselves to put all MANNER of caveats and provisos on any testimony concerning such a "course and direction" component of their testimony.
No. The truth is: with the physical evidence, the science speaks for itself. It is flatly consistent with the account Zimmerman gave right from jump street.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
Some of us are actually in the "Trial" thread watching the trial and some of us just show up once in a while to hit the race and Cadillac card.
I'm honing my derailing skills, at the end of 4 weeks, I'll be the derailing queen.
That's kind of presumptuous. The stippling and ME's report shows only that the muzzle of the weapon was very close to Martin's chest at the time it was fired. Being either in direct contract or in the 4-6 inch range. That is it, it does not confirm Zimmerman's story and there is actually another reasonable explanation that fit's all the evidence.
Evidence:
1. Martin's wound showing close proximity of the muzzle.
2. Zimmerman having GSR on his hands.
3. Zimmerman not having GSR on the front of his jacket or sleeves.
4. Zimmerman not having any Martin DNA for blood evidencec on the front of his jacket.
5. The trajectory of the bullet path being perpendicular to the plan of Martin's chest (in other words a straight in shot.)
6. Grass stains on Zimmerman's knees.
7. No grass stains on Zimmerman's jacket (IIRC, there we no stains on Zimmerman's jacket, it was Ofc. Smith (first resonder) that had in his report that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had grass on it, having grass on it and having grass stains are two different things.)
Zimmerman's Story:
1. Zimmerman was on the ground at the time the weapons was discharged.
2. Martin was on top of him "whaling" (yes he used that term in the audio tapes) on Zimmerman's face, eventually they struggled for the gun which means Martin was bent over Zimmerman while being on top.
Scenerio #1:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top bent over trying to get control of a firearm. The person on the bottom shoots the person in the chest, the person dies and the person on the bottom rolls the dead body off.
Scenerio #2:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top. The person on top has had enough and tries to get off OR the person on the bottom gains enough leverage to push the person on top off. During body separation the person that was on the bottom draws his weapon, extends his arm, points the weapon a the center of mass of the person that was on top and pulls the trigger.
Issues:
1. When a firearm is discharge it generates GSR which exists the muzzle (contributing to the stippling of the skin (due to close proximity) but is also expelled out the ejection port (on a semi-automatic). With two bodies close together, no GSR was found on Zimmerman (except for his hands) indicative that his arm was extended way from his body. But with the chests of both parties close together, the shooters arm would have extended through the other body.
2. With the chests close together and Martin over Zimmerman, there was no blood evidence transferred to Zimmerman jacket.
3. The trajectory of the bullet being perpendicular to the plan of the chest would be difficult and unnatural to achieve for two reasons: (1) Zimmerman would have had to draw the weapon and maneuver it between the struggling bodies, and (2) he describes he and Martin struggling for the weapon. So a perpendicular chest shot under those conditions? I'd like to see some expert testimony on that.
Scenario #2 is actually a more logical possibility given the available evidence then is scenario #1. Now this would depend on witnesses that actually were looking at the scene at the exact time of the shooting and can confirm the muzzle flashes occurred when Martin was on top. If that is the case, then scenario #2 is eliminated, but my recollection is that the neighbors were not on scene when the weapon was fired.
>>>>
What a fantasy based set of musings.
Nope.
The wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head are consistent with his account.
The busted nose is consistent with his account.
The grass on HIS back is consistent with HIS account.
the grass stains on the knees of Trayvon Martin's pants is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
The close contact wound is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
And you have no support for your weird-ass claim about the "trajectory" of the bullet wound. If you could EVER get a real expert to describe the mechanism for a bullet's path and direction inside of a body as it was engaged in some kind of struggle with the shooter, you'd be one unique advocate. Most experts worth their CV would trip over themselves to put all MANNER of caveats and provisos on any testimony concerning such a "course and direction" component of their testimony.
No. The truth is: with the physical evidence, the science speaks for itself. It is flatly consistent with the account Zimmerman gave right from jump street.
Zimmerman's wounds, grass on his back, are close proximity firearm discharge are consistint with Zimmerman and Martin being in a struggle. That is different then being consistent with the evidence which may presented with about the situation at the time the firearm was discharged.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
1. Per Zimmerman's account he stopped following Martin when told to do so by the dispatcher, his claim is he went behind the houses to find a street sign. Physical evidence from the development shows they don't mount street signs behind houses, they are placed at intersections. Street signs were located to the west and south of Zimmerman's truck, he traveled east.
2. Zimmerman describes walking back toward the truck on the east/west sidewalk. His account is that Martin punched him in the face, knocking him to the ground, Martin climbing on top, "whaling" away at his face, and then there being a struggle for the gun. However the physical evidence shows the body well down the southern walkway. A location inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.
3. The lack of GSR on the front of Zimmerman's jacket is inconsistent with his description of events by discharging the firearm between the two as they struggled.
>>>>
In this day and age of e communications it is riddiculious to assume that there are people who have not heard about this case.
Actually, if they do happen to pick a jury of people who know nothing about it, then they would have to be the dumbest morons on the planet.
Oh, I don't know. During the whole OJ debacle, I made a concerted effort to avoid all coverage and discussion of the damned thing, and to know nothing about it, because I didn't WANT to know.
So it's possible to do, if you work at it.
i just want a fair trial
hopefully those wanting on the jury with an agenda
will be weeded out
They got rid of one guy who seemed to be biased against Zimmerman....
And he was doing everything he could to get on that jury...
In this day and age of e communications it is riddiculious to assume that there are people who have not heard about this case.
Actually, if they do happen to pick a jury of people who know nothing about it, then they would have to be the dumbest morons on the planet.
Oh, I don't know. During the whole OJ debacle, I made a concerted effort to avoid all coverage and discussion of the damned thing, and to know nothing about it, because I didn't WANT to know.
So it's possible to do, if you work at it.
Yeah when I had my rotator cuff surgery the Michael Jackson crap was all over the TV. When you can't do anything for 3 months, that is the pits. When I had my first knee replacement, I decided to get a cat so I would not have to resort to TV. Wish I had gotten one when MJ was all over the place, but I could switch it off as fast as it came on.
The only reason this is a high profile case because of all the race baiting. Zimmerman is nobody. Martin was nobody. And there is nobody who did or does give a shit about either one of them.
That's kind of presumptuous. The stippling and ME's report shows only that the muzzle of the weapon was very close to Martin's chest at the time it was fired. Being either in direct contract or in the 4-6 inch range. That is it, it does not confirm Zimmerman's story and there is actually another reasonable explanation that fit's all the evidence.
Evidence:
1. Martin's wound showing close proximity of the muzzle.
2. Zimmerman having GSR on his hands.
3. Zimmerman not having GSR on the front of his jacket or sleeves.
4. Zimmerman not having any Martin DNA for blood evidencec on the front of his jacket.
5. The trajectory of the bullet path being perpendicular to the plan of Martin's chest (in other words a straight in shot.)
6. Grass stains on Zimmerman's knees.
7. No grass stains on Zimmerman's jacket (IIRC, there we no stains on Zimmerman's jacket, it was Ofc. Smith (first resonder) that had in his report that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had grass on it, having grass on it and having grass stains are two different things.)
Zimmerman's Story:
1. Zimmerman was on the ground at the time the weapons was discharged.
2. Martin was on top of him "whaling" (yes he used that term in the audio tapes) on Zimmerman's face, eventually they struggled for the gun which means Martin was bent over Zimmerman while being on top.
Scenerio #1:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top bent over trying to get control of a firearm. The person on the bottom shoots the person in the chest, the person dies and the person on the bottom rolls the dead body off.
Scenerio #2:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top. The person on top has had enough and tries to get off OR the person on the bottom gains enough leverage to push the person on top off. During body separation the person that was on the bottom draws his weapon, extends his arm, points the weapon a the center of mass of the person that was on top and pulls the trigger.
Issues:
1. When a firearm is discharge it generates GSR which exists the muzzle (contributing to the stippling of the skin (due to close proximity) but is also expelled out the ejection port (on a semi-automatic). With two bodies close together, no GSR was found on Zimmerman (except for his hands) indicative that his arm was extended way from his body. But with the chests of both parties close together, the shooters arm would have extended through the other body.
2. With the chests close together and Martin over Zimmerman, there was no blood evidence transferred to Zimmerman jacket.
3. The trajectory of the bullet being perpendicular to the plan of the chest would be difficult and unnatural to achieve for two reasons: (1) Zimmerman would have had to draw the weapon and maneuver it between the struggling bodies, and (2) he describes he and Martin struggling for the weapon. So a perpendicular chest shot under those conditions? I'd like to see some expert testimony on that.
Scenario #2 is actually a more logical possibility given the available evidence then is scenario #1. Now this would depend on witnesses that actually were looking at the scene at the exact time of the shooting and can confirm the muzzle flashes occurred when Martin was on top. If that is the case, then scenario #2 is eliminated, but my recollection is that the neighbors were not on scene when the weapon was fired.
>>>>
What a fantasy based set of musings.
Nope.
The wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head are consistent with his account.
The busted nose is consistent with his account.
The grass on HIS back is consistent with HIS account.
the grass stains on the knees of Trayvon Martin's pants is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
The close contact wound is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
And you have no support for your weird-ass claim about the "trajectory" of the bullet wound. If you could EVER get a real expert to describe the mechanism for a bullet's path and direction inside of a body as it was engaged in some kind of struggle with the shooter, you'd be one unique advocate. Most experts worth their CV would trip over themselves to put all MANNER of caveats and provisos on any testimony concerning such a "course and direction" component of their testimony.
No. The truth is: with the physical evidence, the science speaks for itself. It is flatly consistent with the account Zimmerman gave right from jump street.
Zimmerman's wounds, grass on his back, are close proximity firearm discharge are consistint with Zimmerman and Martin being in a struggle. That is different then being consistent with the evidence which may presented with about the situation at the time the firearm was discharged.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
1. Per Zimmerman's account he stopped following Martin when told to do so by the dispatcher, his claim is he went behind the houses to find a street sign. Physical evidence from the development shows they don't mount street signs behind houses, they are placed at intersections. Street signs were located to the west and south of Zimmerman's truck, he traveled east.
2. Zimmerman describes walking back toward the truck on the east/west sidewalk. His account is that Martin punched him in the face, knocking him to the ground, Martin climbing on top, "whaling" away at his face, and then there being a struggle for the gun. However the physical evidence shows the body well down the southern walkway. A location inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.
3. The lacks of GSR on the front of Zimmerman's jacket is inconsistent with his description of events by discharging the firearm between the two as they struggled.
>>>>
'
I think it is utterly repulsive that so many people regard this trial as entertainment.
.
:
It is also repulsive that you think you have some claim to being the judge of the attitudes and behaviors of so many other people when you are such a dill-weed twerp.
,
Aren't we all just offering our opinions on the matter, all of whom should be allowed to do so without the name calling.
That's kind of presumptuous. The stippling and ME's report shows only that the muzzle of the weapon was very close to Martin's chest at the time it was fired. Being either in direct contract or in the 4-6 inch range. That is it, it does not confirm Zimmerman's story and there is actually another reasonable explanation that fit's all the evidence.
Evidence:
1. Martin's wound showing close proximity of the muzzle.
2. Zimmerman having GSR on his hands.
3. Zimmerman not having GSR on the front of his jacket or sleeves.
4. Zimmerman not having any Martin DNA for blood evidencec on the front of his jacket.
5. The trajectory of the bullet path being perpendicular to the plan of Martin's chest (in other words a straight in shot.)
6. Grass stains on Zimmerman's knees.
7. No grass stains on Zimmerman's jacket (IIRC, there we no stains on Zimmerman's jacket, it was Ofc. Smith (first resonder) that had in his report that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had grass on it, having grass on it and having grass stains are two different things.)
Zimmerman's Story:
1. Zimmerman was on the ground at the time the weapons was discharged.
2. Martin was on top of him "whaling" (yes he used that term in the audio tapes) on Zimmerman's face, eventually they struggled for the gun which means Martin was bent over Zimmerman while being on top.
Scenerio #1:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top bent over trying to get control of a firearm. The person on the bottom shoots the person in the chest, the person dies and the person on the bottom rolls the dead body off.
Scenerio #2:
Two people are struggling on the ground, on is on the bottom and the other is on top. The person on top has had enough and tries to get off OR the person on the bottom gains enough leverage to push the person on top off. During body separation the person that was on the bottom draws his weapon, extends his arm, points the weapon a the center of mass of the person that was on top and pulls the trigger.
Issues:
1. When a firearm is discharge it generates GSR which exists the muzzle (contributing to the stippling of the skin (due to close proximity) but is also expelled out the ejection port (on a semi-automatic). With two bodies close together, no GSR was found on Zimmerman (except for his hands) indicative that his arm was extended way from his body. But with the chests of both parties close together, the shooters arm would have extended through the other body.
2. With the chests close together and Martin over Zimmerman, there was no blood evidence transferred to Zimmerman jacket.
3. The trajectory of the bullet being perpendicular to the plan of the chest would be difficult and unnatural to achieve for two reasons: (1) Zimmerman would have had to draw the weapon and maneuver it between the struggling bodies, and (2) he describes he and Martin struggling for the weapon. So a perpendicular chest shot under those conditions? I'd like to see some expert testimony on that.
Scenario #2 is actually a more logical possibility given the available evidence then is scenario #1. Now this would depend on witnesses that actually were looking at the scene at the exact time of the shooting and can confirm the muzzle flashes occurred when Martin was on top. If that is the case, then scenario #2 is eliminated, but my recollection is that the neighbors were not on scene when the weapon was fired.
>>>>
What a fantasy based set of musings.
Nope.
The wounds on the back of Zimmerman's head are consistent with his account.
The busted nose is consistent with his account.
The grass on HIS back is consistent with HIS account.
the grass stains on the knees of Trayvon Martin's pants is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
The close contact wound is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
And you have no support for your weird-ass claim about the "trajectory" of the bullet wound. If you could EVER get a real expert to describe the mechanism for a bullet's path and direction inside of a body as it was engaged in some kind of struggle with the shooter, you'd be one unique advocate. Most experts worth their CV would trip over themselves to put all MANNER of caveats and provisos on any testimony concerning such a "course and direction" component of their testimony.
No. The truth is: with the physical evidence, the science speaks for itself. It is flatly consistent with the account Zimmerman gave right from jump street.
Zimmerman's wounds, grass on his back, are close proximity firearm discharge are consistint with Zimmerman and Martin being in a struggle. That is different then being consistent with the evidence which may presented with about the situation at the time the firearm was discharged.
there is no evidence that is not consistent with Zimmerman's account.
1. Per Zimmerman's account he stopped following Martin when told to do so by the dispatcher, his claim is he went behind the houses to find a street sign. Physical evidence from the development shows they don't mount street signs behind houses, they are placed at intersections. Street signs were located to the west and south of Zimmerman's truck, he traveled east.
2. Zimmerman describes walking back toward the truck on the east/west sidewalk. His account is that Martin punched him in the face, knocking him to the ground, Martin climbing on top, "whaling" away at his face, and then there being a struggle for the gun. However the physical evidence shows the body well down the southern walkway. A location inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.
3. The lack of GSR on the front of Zimmerman's jacket is inconsistent with his description of events by discharging the firearm between the two as they struggled.
>>>>
