17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #27

[Marshmallow]

Originally Posted by Cher352

Here is the copy of the enhanced version on ABC's site. Not quit as dramatic as the one shown above but marks still showing.

Due to the elongated marks I wonder if his head was hitting the edge right where the grass and the sidewalk meet.

Also when the first video aired I thought GZ had a bald spot at the top of his head but after seeing his court video that is not the case, he doesn't have a bald spot. Was his head beaten to the point that the hair was removed or would swelling have caused the appearance of bald skin?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-mar...ry?id=16055412

I see what may be a scrape but with the version you're showing I see a shine on his head with a reflection of lights.

[annalia]

Originally Posted by Cher352

Here is the copy of the enhanced version on ABC's site. Not quit as dramatic as the one shown above but marks still showing.

Due to the elongated marks I wonder if his head was hitting the edge right where the grass and the sidewalk meet.

Also when the first video aired I thought GZ had a bald spot at the top of his head but after seeing his court video that is not the case, he doesn't have a bald spot. Was his head beaten to the point that the hair was removed or would swelling have caused the appearance of bald skin?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-mar...ry?id=16055412

What's wrong with the police officer's ear and nose, and why does it look like a big bruise under his eye. Does it look like that in the video?

And if this is supposed to be clearer and less distorted, why does the lettering on the back of the police car seem distorted?

ETA: I don't know, I guess time will tell exactly what it is, but to me it almost looks like it's just his hair. I can also make out two faint lines on the left side of his head.

The redness to me looks similar to what we see on the police officer. Don't know the technical terms, but whatever they did to enhance it that caused redness can be seen on the officer, as well as on GZ's neck.

ETA2: Look at the police officer's head and face, he has what looks like a white line that goes all the way from the back of his head down to the bottom of his face.

JMHO

[Concerned Papa]

Originally Posted by JBean

My assumption is that he went to the station voluntarily. Even though he was in cuffs-they may have asked him if he would come into the station for questioning and cuffs may be SOP after a shooting death.
I think this issue would only become important if down the road Zimmerman said he was cuffed, detained and transported against his will because that COULD constitute an arrest and that he should have been mirandized.
But for now I concur he was not arrested but understand how it could be arguable to a judge if he did not go along willingly.

JMHO of course.

ETA: It occurs to me that it could also be SOP to cuff anyone that is involved in a shooting death and detain without being elevated to the level of arrest. Since they knew Zimmerman was the shooter I am betting this is what happened. However it still could be an argument for the defense in the future to get any of his statements thrown out.

More of my opinion.

I'm sure you're right but, either way, it sounds like Officer Tim wasn't taking any chances.

[LynnM]

Originally Posted by cityslick

Wouldn't the fact of if he was arrested be in any of the SPD reports though? Wouldn't they notate that they arrested and mirandized GZ and brought him in for questioning?

Well they certainly brought him in for questioning. Legally it sounds like being handcuffed and taken in for questioning is considered to be an arrest. But likely the police at the time are not thinking about what a judge would say about what constitutes an arrest. They are thinking about procedures. They are thinking that no decision has been made about whether to charge him and they don't say, "You are under arrest." They don't put him in a cell, he wasn't given a phone call to an attorney, etc. There's no appearance before a judge. They were given feedback that they shouldn't charge him and they released him after questioning.

I would be very surprised if he was not Mirandized before he gave his statement though and I predict that we'll see that on the tape of his questioning.

[Adrienne37]

It's sure funny to me how this "gash" on Zimmerman's head keeps getting more and more enhanced as time goes on. Perhaps those that are "enhancing" need to learn better use of Photoshop because it certainly doesn't look very authentic to me, just a poor attempt to "prove" that there are marks there when clearly there aren't as evidenced by the original video that was released.


~jmo~

[Cher352]

Originally Posted by cityslick

I agree, either gitana is correct that he was arrested and SPD is lying about him being arrested or he really wasn't. If they didn't mirandize him, they for sure are not going to say they 'arrested' him because it gets them into all sorts of hot water, he's basically testifying to the officers in the video.

According to this Q&A on this press conference video by SPD stated that GZ was taken into "investigation detention", whatever that term means.

(mark 12:00 of video)

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news...Trayvon-Martin

[JBean]

>>1. What is an arrest?
When you are arrested, you are taken into custody. This means that you are not free to leave the scene. Without being arrested, however, you still could be detained or held for questioning for a short time if a police officer or other person believes you may be involved in a crime. For example, an officer may detain you if you are carrying a large box near a recent burglary site. Storekeepers also can detain you if they suspect you have stolen something.
Whether you are arrested or detained, you do not have to answer any questions except to give your name and address and show some identification if requested.<<

http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimin...rrested.html#1

[PaintingAnemone]

Originally Posted by JBean

My assumption is that he went to the station voluntarily. Even though he was in cuffs-they may have asked him if he would come into the station for questioning and cuffs may be SOP after a shooting death.
I think this issue would only become important if down the road Zimmerman said he was cuffed, detained and transported against his will because that COULD constitute an arrest and that he should have been mirandized.
But for now I concur he was not arrested but understand how it could be arguable to a judge if he did not go along willingly.

JMHO of course.

ETA: It occurs to me that it could also be SOP to cuff anyone that is involved in a shooting death and detain without being elevated to the level of arrest. Since they knew Zimmerman was the shooter I am betting this is what happened. However it still could be an argument for the defense in the future to get any of his statements thrown out.

More of my opinion.

That is my opinion as well. Police often handcuff people that they aren't arresting, even if it's just to incapacitate them until they can decide what to do with them - or maybe I've seen to many cop shows where they cuff a guy, sit him on the curb or in the back of the car while they clear up other aspects of the situation, and then end up releasing him. I suspect it's just SOP to do so in certain situations, even if the person is coming along voluntarily. Considering how comfortable Zimmerman looks while hanging around and chatting with the officers in the video, walking around freely, not being watched or treated with suspicion, etc., he is almost certainly there voluntarily. He looks like someone who already knows he'll get to go home later, but, again, that's JMO.

[2goldfish]

Originally Posted by Concerned Papa

I almost wish Steft50 hadn't made this post last night. Now I'm hung up on trying to understand how someone on the bottom.....



getting brutally beaten.....brains smashed on the sidewalk.....loosing consciousness .....short of breath.....and swallowing his own blood.....could ever reach into the waist on the INSIDE of his britches.....that his attacker is sitting on.....



draw out his little gun.....



and shoot his attacker in the chest, killing him.

I just don't get it.

snipped images for blowing margins...


that's what I've been saying....is does not pass the sniff test....the only way it could possibly have happened is if GZ already had the gun out....which in that case, if you believe an unarmed 17 yo was gonna attack and waste time beating someone's head into concrete rather than concentrate on the firearm, I got bridges to sell ya in both brooklyn and london.

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by JBean

>>1. What is an arrest?
When you are arrested, you are taken into custody. This means that you are not free to leave the scene. Without being arrested, however, you still could be detained or held for questioning for a short time if a police officer or other person believes you may be involved in a crime. For example, an officer may detain you if you are carrying a large box near a recent burglary site. Storekeepers also can detain you if they suspect you have stolen something.
Whether you are arrested or detained, you do not have to answer any questions except to give your name and address and show some identification if requested.<<

http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimin...rrested.html#1

Sounds like this is what happened IMO. If true, I don't think they would of mirandized him. Then the next question is if what he was saying in the video can be used in court?

[JBean]

Originally Posted by PaintingAnemone

That is my opinion as well. Police often handcuff people that they aren't arresting, even if it's just to incapacitate them until they can decide what to do with them - or maybe I've seen to many cop shows where they cuff a guy, sit him on the curb or in the back of the car while they clear up other aspects of the situation, and then end up releasing him. I suspect it's just SOP to do so in certain situations, even if the person is coming along voluntarily. Considering how comfortable Zimmerman looks while hanging around and chatting with the officers in the video, walking around freely, not being watched or treated with suspicion, etc., he is almost certainly there voluntarily. He looks like someone who already knows he'll get to go home later, but, again, that's JMO.

I think cuffing is defintiely SOP. They can do that all day long without an arrest. The only issue is the transportation to the station. Either he went along willingly-which I assume he did -or it is ok to transport someone when they are involved ina shooting death. Either way to LE this did not constitute an arrest-but perhaps could be argued that it did rise to the level, but I think it would fail with what we know at this point.
JMHO

[Cher352]

Found this at one of the FL lawyer's sites:

There are three types of law enforcement contacts with citizens, consensual encounters, temporary detentions and arrests.

A temporary detention occurs when a law enforcement officer restrains a citizen's freedom of movement for a temporary period of time to conduct an investigation. To temporarily detain a citizen, the law enforcement officer must establish facts sufficient to prove that he or she has a reasonable suspicion to believe that the person had committed, was committing or was about to commit a crime. If the law enforcement officer determines, after conducting an investigation, That the person has not committed a crime, then the law enforcement officer must allow the person to go free. A citizen who has been temporarily detained has the right to remain silent and to not answer the law enforcement officer's questions.

(I guess I can't link to it though because it is not Hornsby site)

http://www.faulknerlegalgroup.com/FA...y-allowed.aspx

[JBean]

Originally Posted by cityslick

Sounds like this is what happened IMO. If true, I don't think they would of mirandized him. Then the next question is if what he was saying in the video can be used in court?

I do not think he was mirandized either, but that is just a guess. I think anything he said can and will be used against him in a court of law.
JMHO.

[norest4thewicked]

Originally Posted by Marshmallow

it appears that the color/hue/saturation has been fiddled with making what may be scratches appear to be wounds.

Who do you think "fiddled" with it?

[2goldfish]

Originally Posted by Adrienne37

It's sure funny to me how this "gash" on Zimmerman's head keeps getting more and more enhanced as time goes on. Perhaps those that are "enhancing" need to learn better use of Photoshop because it certainly doesn't look very authentic to me, just a poor attempt to "prove" that there are marks there when clearly there aren't as evidenced by the original video that was released.


~jmo~

and it's all to no avail too. the pics taken at the police station that night and the following day (bruising does not show immediately I think we can all agree on that so I hope the PD wasnt totally that worthless to not even try to make GZ's claims appear legit with next day pics) is what will show if GZ's claims of the brutal beating are in fact true. it's wasting time photoshopping a VERY low res image, it doesnt prove anything one way or another. TBH the marks look like blood smears to me, and whose blood? I can hazard a guess - trayvon's.

[magnolia]

Originally Posted by pcrum12

Right side looks like a laceration to me - JMO

Yes, it does, but to be honest, the crisscross marks look a bit fake to me.

[norest4thewicked]

Originally Posted by magnolia

Yes, it does, but to be honest, the crisscross marks look a bit fake to me.

I think this is a combination of the injury, reflection and artifacts.

[Phoenixfla]

Originally Posted by Adrienne37

It's sure funny to me how this "gash" on Zimmerman's head keeps getting more and more enhanced as time goes on. Perhaps those that are "enhancing" need to learn better use of Photoshop because it certainly doesn't look very authentic to me, just a poor attempt to "prove" that there are marks there when clearly there aren't as evidenced by the original video that was released.


~jmo~

Whom created these enhanced videos? Wasn't it the MSM?

[Emeralgem]

Originally Posted by cityslick

Considering the fact that NBC already fired two people (including a producer) over the 911 tape, I doubt a news agency would do the same thing again and 'doctor' a photo IMO.

Ever consider the fact the news agency was counting on the viewing public to think the same as you do? MSM is like that... JMHO

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by Emeralgem

Ever consider the fact the news agency was counting on the viewing public to think the same as you do? MSM is like that... JMHO

I personally don't think MSM gets in the habit of altering images in order to push one side of the story or another, there's plenty of that already in this case IMO. Enhanced and altering are two different things in my mind. Enhance to me means bringing out or lowering the color. Altering is actually changing the image, putting pixels in different places to make something appear there that really isn't there. That's basically forgery and I would think a very serious offense for a news agency.

[Emeralgem]

Originally Posted by cityslick

I personally don't think MSM gets in the habit of altering images in order to push one side of the story or another, there's plenty of that already in this case IMO. Enhanced and altering are two different things in my mind. Enhance to me means bringing out or lowering the color. Altering is actually changing the image, putting pixels in different places to make something appear there that really isn't there. That's basically forgery and I would think a very serious offense for a news agency.

BBM..IMHO..No disrespect intended, but I suggest you think again...JMHO

[tehcloser]

So MSN would mess with a tape, but not a picture?

[Gin]

Originally Posted by annalia

What's wrong with the police officer's ear and nose, and why does it look like a big bruise under his eye. Does it look like that in the video?

And if this is supposed to be clearer and less distorted, why does the lettering on the back of the police car seem distorted?

ETA: I don't know, I guess time will tell exactly what it is, but to me it almost looks like it's just his hair. I can also make out two faint lines on the left side of his head.

The redness to me looks similar to what we see on the police officer. Don't know the technical terms, but whatever they did to enhance it that caused redness can be seen on the officer, as well as on GZ's neck.

ETA2: Look at the police officer's head and face, he has what looks like a white line that goes all the way from the back of his head down to the bottom of his face.

JMHO

JMO/IMO
I also see a "bad bruise" between the police officers sleeve cuff and elbow. I can't miss the very red, apparent "serious injury" in his eye area. Something's squirrelly here.

[annalia]

Originally Posted by Gin

JMO/IMO
I also see a "bad bruise" between the police officers sleeve cuff and elbow. I can't miss the very red, apparent "serious injury" in his eye area. Something's squirrelly here.

It also shows that same redness right above that little blob that's supposed to be his ear, by his hairline on the side of his face.

You would think that the police officer was the one who was in a major fight for his life.

JMHO

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by tehcloser

So MSN would mess with a tape, but not a picture?

They didn't change the tape, they just cut a part out. That's way different than actually altering (photoshopping) an image. The comparison would be if they actually somehow changed the 911 tape to make GZ say something that was never said.

Even so, there were reprimands even for that.