George Zimmerman's Injuries #1

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry for the derailing the thread.

It is called a Stytic pencil. We always used a plain aspirin.

Back to your regular programming....
 
francie said:
George's 'source' claimed he was frightened that Trayvon was circling his vehicle. But that didn't happen imo because Trayvon wasn't "at" George's vehicle, because George didn't call 911 EMERGENCY & didn't bother to tell the dispatcher! Plus George had to run after Trayvon to catch up and kill him, and that's a fact because we know Trayvon was shot approx 233 ft from George's truck per Concerned Papa's great maps & SFD calls.

Imo George did NOT have the injuries he claims, there was no actual 'fight' because Trayvon was just trying to get away when George pulled his gun, thus the horrible cries from Trayvon before he was shot. So..... was George frightened, threatened, ticked-off or obsessed with a black kid that dared to walk on "George's" property when he decided to pursue & kill him? All JMO.

:moo:
Click to expand...

With all due respect to Concerned Papa and his thought provoing map, we do not know for a fact where GZ's truck was parked. The SFD audio did not reveal where GZ's truck was parked. The police have never released the exact location of where either GZ's truck or TM's body were found that night. Hopefully we will be availed of those facts SOON!!

JMO
 
I am lost now. Where do the butterfly clamps suddenly come in. More specifically what the heck are medical butterfly clamps anyway? No such thing was shown on any video when GZ was taken to the police station shortly after the shooting.
A neighbor mentioned that GZ had a butterfly bandaid on the back of his head and a protective plaster on his nose the next day while he was getting ready to get out of Dodge.
And from this older pretty detailed article (before all the embellishments started) I snipped this:

“They were not huge gashes,” the father said. “When he went to the doctor the next day, he said he could stitch it, but that he would have to recut it since it had started to heal. He may not have gone to the hospital earlier than that because he was in police custody for a while, and was very shaken up afterwards.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/u...-a-review-of-ideals.html?_r=4&pagewanted=7&hp
"
 
ILikeToBendPages said:
I know the photo shows two cuts. I've never said he had none ,but it's the lack of injuries in those places. If your laying on your back with your head being pounded, wouldn't you be moving around trying to buck the person off that is beating the crap out of you?

I would expect to see bloody abrasions along with the gashes. I would expect to see more blood and in more places than what is shown in that photo. Wouldn't you be grabbing the hands that were holding your head to make them stop and let go? Wouldn't you, in a death struggle, be moving all over the place, moving your head and body around trying to get away.

That to me, as a reasonable person, seems more likely than two minor cuts on the back of his head that really had a small amount of blood.

I think GZ took it upon himself to be an armed patrol and a bully and a young man got killed. It wasn't like he had no choices to make. He made a choice and created a hostile situation and a confrontation that ended in a young boys death.

He could of made his presence known in less aggressive ways and made his point.

He could of diffused the situation by making eye contact and a hey how are? Most people would nod and move on after being seen. That was what Trayvon was doing. He was seen by a strange acting man that was now after him. He had every reason to be alarmed and he was doing exactly what the majority of people would of done. He was moving on.
Click to expand...

Where there any injuries to TM??? So TM attacked him for looking at him where is that allowed. If I saw a strange man looking at me when I was 17 I would have out ran him to my house where there was help. I don't think I would have attacked an adult. A 17 year old could easily out run an adult any day of the week especially running scared.
 
Indy Anna said:
Why would GZ suddenly turn around and walk away from TM while asking him what he was doing there, and after TM asked why he was following him?
Click to expand...

You're misunderstanding what I said. We know there was a period of time where Zimmerman was not chasing Trayvon. We know that based on the 911 call there was a good period of time where Zimmerman was speaking to a dispatcher after he lost sight of Trayvon. We know this confrontation didn't happen at that time because the 911 dispatcher would have the conversation on tape. Zimmerman was not said to be returning to his car until after he hung up with the dispatcher. That's where we pick up, with Zimmerman heading back to his car after hanging up with 911:

- Trayvon: Why are you following me?
*Zimmerman stops and turns around to see who is talking to him*
- Zimmerman: What are you doing here?


And, why dismiss the words of TM's gf but not those of GZ, the one who pulled the trigger? LE has determined that she and TM were talking on the cell phone around the time of the incident, and GZ's recorded 911 call does corroborate her claim that GZ was following TM. The gf's testimony isn't any less credible than an eyewitness account.

I think the case will hinge on expert testimony regarding whose voice was heard screaming for help.
Click to expand...

The words of Trayvon are coming from a 3rd party, which is hearsay. Not very often is it even allowed in court, and when it is, not very often would a prosecutor use it unless it helps their story. In this case there is nothing that states who confronted who, as per the example I made above, it could very well be that Trayvon approached Zimmerman. The defense will use this against the prosecution if she's called to testify, I promise you that.
 
Omachka said:
BBM Are you basing your opinion on being a lawyer? If so, please get verified. I have lots of questions. :waitasec:

I think she will be called under the Florida Statutes under Evidence 90.803 Hearsay Exceptions. IMHO paragraphs (1)(2) and (3) all apply.

http://law.onecle.com/florida/evidence/90.803.html
Click to expand...

No, I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I have worked for lawyers but I am not a lawyer, I was simply putting myself in the shoes of a defense lawyer on this case.
 
AJ Noiter said:
You're misunderstanding what I said. We know there was a period of time where Zimmerman was not chasing Trayvon. We know that based on the 911 call there was a good period of time where Zimmerman was speaking to a dispatcher after he lost sight of Trayvon. We know this confrontation didn't happen at that time because the 911 dispatcher would have the conversation on tape. Zimmerman was not said to be returning to his car until after he hung up with the dispatcher. That's where we pick up, with Zimmerman heading back to his car after hanging up with 911:

- Trayvon: Why are you following me?
*Zimmerman stops and turns around to see who is talking to him*
- Zimmerman: What are you doing here?




The words of Trayvon are coming from a 3rd party, which is hearsay. Not very often is it even allowed in court, and when it is, not very often would a prosecutor use it unless it helps their story. In this case there is nothing that states who confronted who, as per the example I made above, it could very well be that Trayvon approached Zimmerman. The defense will use this against the prosecution if she's called to testify, I promise you that.
Click to expand...

It doesn't really make sense to me that TM would approach him and ask him why he is following TM, from behind so that G has to turn around to see who is talking to him.

If TM approaches GZ from behind and GZ has to turn around to see TM, he was clearly not following TM, it was TM who was following GZ so why on earth would TM have asked that question?
 
FULTON said:
Where there any injuries to TM??? So TM attacked him for looking at him where is that allowed. If I saw a strange man looking at me when I was 17 I would have out ran him to my house where there was help. I don't think I would have attacked an adult. A 17 year old could easily out run an adult any day of the week especially running scared.
Click to expand...

Running to where? He was almost home. And only a 14 year old was at home. Trayvon might have not wanted to inform the freaky scary stranger where he was living. No guarantee that the loon would not be banging and/or breaking down the door. I think an attack was justified and logical if it really happened.. He tried (unsuccessful) to lose GZ earlier. He already had done that part of running away from the aggressor. .
 
AJ Noiter said:
You're misunderstanding what I said. We know there was a period of time where Zimmerman was not chasing Trayvon. We know that based on the 911 call there was a good period of time where Zimmerman was speaking to a dispatcher after he lost sight of Trayvon. We know this confrontation didn't happen at that time because the 911 dispatcher would have the conversation on tape. Zimmerman was not said to be returning to his car until after he hung up with the dispatcher. That's where we pick up, with Zimmerman heading back to his car after hanging up with 911:

- Trayvon: Why are you following me?
*Zimmerman stops and turns around to see who is talking to him*
- Zimmerman: What are you doing here?




The words of Trayvon are coming from a 3rd party, which is hearsay. Not very often is it even allowed in court, and when it is, not very often would a prosecutor use it unless it helps their story. In this case there is nothing that states who confronted who, as per the example I made above, it could very well be that Trayvon approached Zimmerman. The defense will use this against the prosecution if she's called to testify, I promise you that.
Click to expand...

BBM. The friend heard what Trayvon and the unknown-to-her man said to each other. She is an ear witness just like many of the 911 callers who reported arguing, shouts for help and wailing. That is not hearsay.

Trayvon's statement "He's right behind me again!" is hearsay but would probably be an exception to the hearsay rule because it was an excited utterance IMO.
 
LynnM said:
BBM. The friend heard what Trayvon and the unknown-to-her man said to each other. She is an ear witness just like many of the 911 callers who reported arguing, shouts for help and wailing. That is not hearsay.

Trayvon's statement "He's right behind me again!" is hearsay but would probably be an exception to the hearsay rule because it was an excited utterance IMO.
Click to expand...

The other ear witness statements were recorded in real time - the shots can be heard in the background - that wouldn't really be hearsay, IMO.
 
Donjeta said:
It doesn't really make sense to me that TM would approach him and ask him why he is following TM, from behind so that G has to turn around to see who is talking to him.

If TM approaches GZ from behind and GZ has to turn around to see TM, he was clearly not following TM, it was TM who was following GZ so why on earth would TM have asked that question?
Click to expand...

My example doesn't have to make sense, it's an example that was thought up in less than a minute. Any good defense lawyer will see that this case will ultimately be decided by showing that it's possible (doesn't even have to be likely) that Martin approached Zimmerman. The proof is on the prosecution, not the defense. The defense doesn't have to have a story that could make sense, they just have to put some doubt that the ONLY way it could happen is if Zimmerman approached Martin. The testimony from the girlfriend itself has a TON of room for doubt in it without the defense even touching it.
 
rotterdam said:
Running to where? He was almost home. And only a 14 year old was at home. Trayvon might have not wanted to inform the freaky scary stranger where he was living. No guarantee that the loon would not be banging and/or breaking down the door. I think an attack was justified and logical if it really happened.. He tried (unsuccessful) to lose GZ earlier. He already had done that part of running away from the aggressor. .
Click to expand...

IMO, GZ did not, by any stretch, look freaky or scary on the video 30 minutes after the shooting. He's just a regular guy in regular clothing. TM started running while GZ was simply sitting in his truck. From what we now learn, TM was stalking GZ's truck by circling it. He is now the freaky, scary, suspicious guy.

GZ was not lurking around or threatening TM when GZ called dispatch. He was a clean cut guy in an SUV driving slow and looking at TM, period. If TM ran at that point because he was scared, he could have made it home and back three times. I can't help but wonder if he did run home, drop something off, and circle back to see if the guy saw him do anything.

JMO
 
AJ Noiter said:
My example doesn't have to make sense, it's an example that was thought up in less than a minute. Any good defense lawyer will see that this case will ultimately be decided by showing that it's possible (doesn't even have to be likely) that Martin approached Zimmerman. The proof is on the prosecution, not the defense. The defense doesn't have to have a story that could make sense, they just have to put some doubt that the ONLY way it could happen is if Zimmerman approached Martin. The testimony from the girlfriend itself has a TON of room for doubt in it without the defense even touching it.
Click to expand...

If they are basing their case on stating that TM approached Zimmerman, then wouldn't they be relying on an affirmative defense of self-defense? If so, then the burden of proof would shift to the defense I think.

PS I forgot to tell you :welcome: to the group.
 
vlpate said:
IMO, GZ did not, by any stretch, look freaky or scary on the video 30 minutes after the shooting. He's just a regular guy in regular clothing. TM started running while GZ was simply sitting in his truck. From what we now learn, TM was stalking GZ's truck by circling it. He is now the freaky, scary, suspicious guy.

GZ was not lurking around or threatening TM when GZ called dispatch. He was a clean cut guy in an SUV driving slow and looking at TM, period. If TM ran at that point because he was scared, he could have made it home and back three times. I can't help but wonder if he did run home, drop something off, and circle back to see if the guy saw him do anything.

JMO
Click to expand...

Well we can respectfully agree to disagree. A normal civilized person would have opened his car window and ask Trayvon why he was in that community and that would have been the end of it. A silent not uniformed stranger in an unmarked car is scary IMO to a 17 year old kid.
But GZ was hell bent to ensnare himself an imaginary burglar and look good to LE.
He was probably hoping to catch Trayvon in a breaking and entering act. Informing Trayvon that he was a NW guy would throw a monkey wrench in that plan. All IMO.,
 
Omachka said:
If they are basing their case on stating that TM approached Zimmerman, then wouldn't they be relying on an affirmative defense of self-defense? If so, then the burden of proof would shift to the defense I think.

PS I forgot to tell you :welcome: to the group.
Click to expand...

Not sure about Florida specifically but I believe they would still have to prove that the death was unlawful, while Zimmerman's medical records would probably cover most, if not all, that he would need to claim self defense (or SYG as it might be).

Thanks!
 
AJ Noiter said:
You're misunderstanding what I said. We know there was a period of time where Zimmerman was not chasing Trayvon. We know that based on the 911 call there was a good period of time where Zimmerman was speaking to a dispatcher after he lost sight of Trayvon. We know this confrontation didn't happen at that time because the 911 dispatcher would have the conversation on tape. Zimmerman was not said to be returning to his car until after he hung up with the dispatcher. That's where we pick up, with Zimmerman heading back to his car after hanging up with 911:

- Trayvon: Why are you following me?
*Zimmerman stops and turns around to see who is talking to him*
- Zimmerman: What are you doing here?




The words of Trayvon are coming from a 3rd party, which is hearsay. Not very often is it even allowed in court, and when it is, not very often would a prosecutor use it unless it helps their story. In this case there is nothing that states who confronted who, as per the example I made above, it could very well be that Trayvon approached Zimmerman. The defense will use this against the prosecution if she's called to testify, I promise you that.
Click to expand...

I agree, her words will be used by the defense to show TM started the confrontation.IMO Mr.Crump knows this and like the picture of a much younger and smaller TM was first shown to the media to fire up the public.JMO
 
Ambrosia said:
Watch a movie with police or bouncers (See GZ's favs) in it and you may see how they go about it. To gain an advantage it's 'Up against the wall' or 'turn around.' Or a hand on the shoulder to help you do just that. Then it's 'feel time' in the pockets or whatever. This will cause a certain amount of outrage from a person who feels innocent as being accosted by a stranger, and he may react right off the bat. Thus being in a position that GZ would want to keep so he would be in control. Any resistance and the next step for GZ would be to use his position as an advantage to make the next move. One technique is used by many a BOUNCER or NIGHTCLUB DOORMEN. It is used at close range and the opponents chance of escape is about zero. It starts out by standing behind your opponent and planting an arm around his throat. BUT I feel that TM may have responded by using his tall size as an advantage, by pushing backward with his head as well as his legs. This would throw GZ off balance and force him backward also. TM could also at that point given GZ a headbutt in the nose. Butt who nose? Now there seem to be short trees with some very low branches at the T. In fact at that very spot that could have caused those scratch like? injuries to the back of GZ's head. Thus those injuries to Zimmerman's head could have been caused by himself in his attempt to use this BOUNCER technique on Martin and failing badly.
Click to expand...

He was never a trained bouncer he worked at an illegal club FGS!His injuries IMO were from hitting the sidewalk not a tree branch.
 
AJ Noiter said:
Not sure about Florida specifically but I believe they would still have to prove that the death was unlawful, while Zimmerman's medical records would probably cover most, if not all, that he would need to claim self defense (or SYG as it might be).

Thanks!
Click to expand...

If he brings up self defense that is an affirmative defense. If you use an affirmative defense you will be admitting you broke the law but that you were justified in doing so. Therefore, Zimmerman would have to admit that the death was unlawful. At least that's how I understand this article:

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/04/what-is-an-affirmative-defense.html

ETA: I think I am straying off the subject of this thread... I apologize for that. Mods, feel free to move whatever you need to the right thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 134 more.
Total: 4,420 (members: 135, guests: 4,285)

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
4,285
Total visitors
4,420
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,404
Messages
17,968,480
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top