Could the "lacerations" have occurred when Trayvon was trying to get away from GZ? We don't know; we also don't KNOW the whole statement GZ gave LE. IMO, this could mean that GZ may have done something physical to provoke Trayvon, such as try to detain him and Trayvon tried to defend himself. Trayvon had NO CLUE who GZ was.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/20/george-zimmerman-bail-hearing_n_1440175.html
I don't think I've read anything stating Martin was being held by GZ and trying to get away, but we can absolutely speculate. In this speculation, did Trayvon hit GZ with something to the back of his head while trying to get away, which caused the lacerations? Seems that would be an awkward dynamic, JMO.
"Gilbreath testified that Zimmerman repeatedly contradicted himself while being interviewed by police and provided statements inconsistent with physical evidence and witness recollections."
This (cited Huffpo article), is the reporter's
interpretation of Gilbreath's testimony. The
actual transcript (CNN), does not say this. In fact, this is what the transcript says:
"UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that in some of those statement when you were confronted about your inconsistencies, you started "I don't remember"?
O'MARA: Outside the scope of direct examination. I will object your honor.
JUDGE LESTER: We'll give you a little bit of leeway. Not a whole lot but a little bit here, ok.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Isn't it true that when you were questioned about the contradictions in your statements
that the police didn't believe it, that you would say "I don't remember"? "
<snip>
IMO, there is nothing and no one that contradicts his story during the time before and after the altercation (see below)
"O'MARA: That statement that he had given you -- sorry, law enforcement that day, that we just talked about, turning around and that he was assaulted, do you have any evidence in your investigation to date that specifically contradicts either of those two pieces of evidence that were in his statement given several hours after the event?
GILBREATH: Which two?
O'MARA: That he turned back to his car. We'll start with that one.
GILBREATH: I have nothing to indicate he did not or did not to that.
O'MARA: My question was
do you have any evidence to contradict or that conflicts with his contention given before he knew any of the evidence that would conflict with the fact that he stated I walked back to my car?
GILBREATH:
No.
O'MARA: No evidence. Correct?
GILBREATH: Understanding -- are you talking about at that point in time?
O'MARA:
Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that
he had turned around and went back to his car?
GILBREATH: Other than his statement,
no.
<snip>
O'MARA:
Any evidence that conflicts any eyewitnesses, anything that
conflicts with the contention that Mr. Martin assaulted first?
GILBREATH: That contention that was given to us by him, other than filling in the figures being one following or chasing the other one, as to who threw the first blow,
no. "
Red emphasis mine.
Welcome to the forum, by the way!!