Another thing that bothers me about her testimony is that she stated that she did not know George Zimmerman was not arrested until after she spoke to his father Mid-March. I find that hard to believe with all the media coverage on this case. Even if she did not watch the news, I would think that she would hear about the controversy from his\her friends.
If I was on the jury and had to weigh the evidence as to someone's guilt, I would not find this witness credible. Not just based on her demeanor, but also on how she embellished her testimony. How do you hear grass over the phone?
I'm not sure that offhand remarks, such as "Yeah, these look like you need stitches and your nose is probably broken" would be on that record.Actually I would say what really makes it a lie is the fact that the EMTs did not mention anything about Zimmerman needing stitches to the back of his head nor that he DID have a broken nose in their report. The report has been released for over a year now and can be found in our document thread for this case.
If they stopped bleeding on their own, why were there blood trails all around his head in the pictures at the police station, after (and even you acknowledge) the EMTs cleaned him up?
Concerning the injuries to Zimmerman, and again this points to a lie, he claims during the walk through that his doctor told him his nose was broken and that he needed one or two stitches to the back of his head YET during the interview in which the "voice stress test" was done he claims the EMT told him the night before his nose was broken and that he needed one or two stitches to the back of his head.
Proof of this in the videos I posted yesterday.
Not that I know of Mel. She explained why she knew she'd be called and was scared because on 48 hrs LE always look at the phones of victims and contacted the last person they'd spoken to.
But those injury photos are misleading, IMO. Zimmerman did not require any bandages, suture tape, butterfly bandage or sutures the night of the shooting. The bleeding had stopped before he even arrived at the police station. I see no serious injuries that prove Zimmerman's claims of a broken nose or having his head banged on a concrete sidewalk repeatedly.
How is a digital, clear photo misleading?
He refused treatment but was cleaned up.
He was obviously hit or punched.
He had obvious wounds to the back of the head.
The severity doesn't really matter. If he thought his life was in danger he had the right to defend himself.
It is OBVIOUS he was injured.
How will the state prove it wasn't self defense?
In any case, I have had injuries that required stitches that stopped bleeding on their own. That doesn't necessarily indicate the severity of the injury.I knew this question was coming. If one looks at the photos before Zimmerman goes to the police station and the photos after Zimmerman is at the police station one will see that the blood trails match perfectly. This to me means that even though EMTs cleaned his face completely of blood they did not completely clean his head and the blood seen at the police station is the same blood that was on his head before EMTs cleaned him up and checked him out.
This is the most controversial and hardest case I have ever watched. To me both GZ and TM are at fault for this sad and tragic loss. A lawyer on one of the shows on HLN said something that made perfect sense and gave me clarity about the events of that night. Both GZ and TM approached this night with prejudgments of the other person and with cultural differences. GZ saw TM as a suspicious troublemaker and TM saw GZ as a no good whatever, wanting to harass him. Neither one were going to just back off and walk away from each other. GZ was determined to find out what TM was up to and TM was determined to not let GZ get away with what TM perceived as harassment. Because of both of their poor judgements TM wound up dead and to me they are equally at fault. The problem lies in how do you punish someone who is still living against someone who ended up dead. I do not know the answer to that question and probably never will.
I am the parent of 2 - college (early 20's) and a high school teacher. So I have been around many, many young people. They pretty much act the way you expect/require them to act. I do not buy the "that's just how teenagers talk these days" excuse. It reminds me of that awful phrase "boys will be boys" which I have always hated. Obviously, from reading here - my standard is in the minority
After sharing many romantic nights with my hubby, rolling in the grass after dark? I can tell you that the sound of grass is REAL, and BEAUTIFUL! :blushing:
1. Totally agree with this.......
2. How much do you punish someone who was clearly trying to save their own life and did not want to kill anyone?
The answer is you don't.
I don't see how the severity of his injuries is that important. The only thing that does is show that he was being attacked. How injured does a person have to be (I'm asking in legal terms) to be in fear of their lives? I've heard of many cases where someone was threatened and shot and killed the aggressor and didn't have a scratch. They were not charged with murder.
But you were rolling in the grass together. Not miles apart, over a cell phone. The truth is that when just one sense is in play, its accuracy diminishes. IMO, there is no way the witness can accurately identify the "sound of grass" over a cell phone. And, IMO, the state trying to pass this off as evidence shows how little evidence they have to support the charges they have brought against GZ.