Blackfields & McWhites, Part 1
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 at 3:49PM “FBI may charge George Zimmerman with hate crime”
That was the heading of an online story published at the WFTV Website on Monday, May 14, 2012. WFTV-Channel 9 is the ABC network affiliate located in Orlando. The opening paragraph was very revealing in the sense of what it failed to do. It revealed nothing new or, for that matter, particularly newsworthy.
SANFORD, Fla. — WFTV has learned charges against George Zimmerman could be getting more serious.
State prosecutors said Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, profiled and stalked 17-year-old Trayvon Martin before killing him, so the FBI is now looking into charging him with a hate crime.
What’s so strange about this kind of journalism is that it fuels the fire. It’s called baiting. While starting the article with a leading statement, WFTV has learned, it offers nothing new beyond what we didn’t already know. What, exactly, did WFTV learn, and what does the word could mean, as in the charges could be getting more serious? THAT’S NOT NEWS! IT’S GUESSING! The article later adds a revelation:
FBI investigators are actively questioning witnesses in the retreat at the Twin Lakes neighborhood, seeking evidence for a possible federal hate crime charge.
Of course they are! That goes without saying. If the FBI is investigating any crime, agents from the bureau routinely interview everyone in sight of the crime. And everywhere else, for that matter. The remainder of the story is nothing more than superfluous fluff, a term I last used early in the Casey Anthony case — long before the trial and, quite possibly, while critiquing another WFTV piece. You see, soon after I began writing about Caylee and her mother, I was reminded of how biased the news could really be. In college in the 1970s, I wrote an article, An unbiased look at news slants that explained how it’s done every day. I’ve republished it over the years (with improvements) and it’s an easy read. It describes how simple it is to write a news story in a manner that subtly offers an opinion.
While attending most of the Casey Anthony hearings beginning in October, 2009, I got a lot of advice from many of the local journalists covering the case. They were familiar with me and my work. It wasn’t just advice, though. There were rumblings going on in O’do, the unofficial slang word for Orlando. Was WFTV on State Attorney Lawson Lamar’s payroll or something? I mean, it took me no time at all to see how blatant it was that the station got the jump on stories coming out of the State, and nothing at all from the defense. It was apparent that WFTV was pro-prosecution, in my opinion, and I was far from alone in my thinking.
In many of the posts I wrote before covering the trial for Orlando magazine, I made my assertions clear about bias. How I know I was far from alone in this regard was because of the feedback I garnered from other journalists covering the case. What’s up with that station? I was asked.
Here’s the deal. I’m not about ready to accuse a television news organization of unfair reporting. You are smart enough to figure it out yourself; but doesn’t it seem like the WFTV headline about charging George Zimmerman with a hate crime is a bit premature and racially baiting? The article contains no meat or any legs to stand on and it only serves to provoke the Trayvon Martin camp of supporters.
I don’t know. Perhaps May 15 was a slow news day around Orlando. It’s interesting to note that the story broke at 4:47 pm, just in time for the 5:00 o’clock news hour, and only one station reported it. Huh. Do you think it has anything to do with ratings?
(By the way, other news outlets reporting on the WFTV story don’t count.)
Dave Knechel | in 18th Circuit Court, Angela Corey, Benjamin Crump, Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, FBI, FDLE, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Forensics, George Zimmerman, Human Interest, Judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark O'Mara, Sanford Police Department, Seminole County, Seminole County Courthouse, Seminole County Sheriff''s Office, Slimm v. Zimm, Social/Political, Stand Your Ground, State Attorney Angela Corey, State Attorney's Office, Sybrina Fulton, Tracy Martin, Trayvon Martin, WFTV, Zimm v. Slimm, marinadedave | Share Article | 1 Reference 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (127)
Well, you just had to add that last sentence!
Call me naive but isn't all crime a hate crime? Sure, they will have to prove that GZ was a racist-good luck with that! Unless the bar gets lowered enough to make the accusation stick. I wonder what the bar is? It used to be to belong to a hate group that targets certain people groups for inane issues like skin color.
Hi, Sherry -
Yes, I had to add that last one because everywhere I went, the story was attributed to WFTV and nowhere else. I did my homework on it.
I don't think all crimes are hate crimes. There are crimes of passion, white collar crimes and an assorted array of transgressions. Wall Street crimes are driven by greed, for instance, not hate. I think Zimmerman does believe his shooting was justified, but the state of Florida does not. While people are taking sides for lots of reasons, some of which have nothing to do with race, I still maintain that Trayvon was walking along and minding his own business. Why did he have to die that day? Lots of people will tell us the reason based on the gospel according to their own opinions, but that's it. Take Frank Taaffe. The more he was interviewed, the more his excuses morphed into something else. I think he's now saying he was there and witnessed the whole encounter. He disgusts me.
Hey! Thanks for commenting. This is a tough one.
Well, I just meant that crimes are actions against another's person and/or property without regard. to their rights.I agree with you that Trayvon did not need to die that night, GZ had it in his mind that this one was not going to get away. Even if he wasn't pursuing Trayvon to "catch" him, say that he was trying to see where he went, that very well would put Trayvon on the defensive. Sometimes fear shows up as toughness on the outside.
Frank Taeffe is one strange dude. I'm getting the impression that he enjoys the limelight from comments I have been reading here and there. But the classiest people in this tragedy are the ones I wish didn't have to display it for the public and that is Trayvon's parents. You cannot lose a greater treasure than your child. My friend just lost her 20 year old son on Mother's Day and it is devastating.
Yeah, this is a tough case not only in the legal sense but there's alot of unnecessary muck added to it and I won't mention what that is-everyone, by now, has heard about it all ad nauseum. WFTV is one source of it. You are doing a great job of covering this case. Soon, we will see some documents that we can comment on, hopefully, sensibly.
Keeping your dad and mom in my prayers, and you, too.
People who commit crimes sure don't care about their victims, but whether they hate them or not is another thing. A genuine hate crime is pretty specific in law and how it's worded. Absolutely, Trayvon did not need to die and that's the crux of my argument in favor of a charge against George Zimmerman. Was it a hate crime? I don't really think so, but GZ could have elements of prejudice inside his head. Heck, we all do to a certain extent. I know Puerto Ricans who can't trust their own people, and this extends to all ethnicities.
That Taaffe dude has way too much salt water in his head or something. What an egotistic jerk! I agree with you that Trayvon's parents have been classy throughout this ordeal. I find it hard to believe that many in the public show no pity whatsoever for their loss; that it was Trayvon's fault, just like Taaffe has been claiming all along.
One of the things I'm trying to point out now is that news stories have a tendency to fuel rumors. This issue with the FBI has been in the news since the story broke. What WFTV reported was nothing but a rehash of old news. That's my only point - to look for flaws in what we consider reliable news sources. I can list a lot of things WFTV had done during the Anthony case, but I do blame one idiot who is no longer there. Some Craig dude.
Thanks for your prayers, Sherry. They are much appreciated.
Hi Dave
Another good post!!!
I don't know what happened the night Travon died. However, I am very opposed to the stand your ground law.
I do not know if Travon attacked Zimmerman. If he did, I think it would be a normal response to being followed by a stranger, especially if he was cornered and his path to his home was blocked.
I do not know what George Zimmerman's intentions were. I don't see how anyone other than George Zimmerman can know what was in his mind. My unsupported opinion would be that he did not set out to kill anyone and was not motivated by hatred. He may have wanted to be a hero. He definitely made some very poor choices with respect to his actions.
I think that the end result is that we have a terrible mess that has greviously harmed everyone involved and would not have occurred if Florida did not have a stand your ground law.
Thank you, Amber.
I, too, am opposed to the stand your ground law. I do not own a gun and I never will. However, I do not harbor ill will against avid gun owners, and I have no problem with protecting one's home and family. I do think that anyone who wants a concealed carry permit should undergo a battery of training and tests, and be highly scrutinized before the permit is issued. In Florida, any nut can own a gun, and it's about as easy to conceal one, too.
I'm looking into the latest news on Zimmerman's injuries and I'm going to write a report on that next, I believe, followed by another story on how misconceptions can lead to degrees of racism, so I don't want to say much about it here. Not yet. I will say that GZ did not set out to kill that evening, but I am convinced he sensed trouble ahead and that's why he went after TM. The sad thing is, George created the trouble he sensed and that's the real tragedy.
I'm not sure where I read it, but a certain case of a man defending his property after a hurricane is what was the impetus for SYG. I can agree to that. But at any other time, the Castle Law should be enough. Let SYG be there for emergency/disasters declared by the state.
Dave~ ~ a reporter at any media outlet should take an unbiased slant. This also applies to blogs. I am afraid that is not the case because of the competition. Medias are money making businesses so what is really wrong with getting a jump up on the competition. All the outlets have their sources. My friend, I believe you do too.
Isn't the idea to write something that will grab the attention of the reader? I did not know that the FBI may be contemplating filing hate charges against Z so it grabbed my attention and I wanted to learn more. Not everyone knows that is a normal practice for the FBI to do their own private investigation. I knew they were called in when a child goes missing. So not all of us were familar with the role of the FBI in a case such as Z's.
In the case of Zimmerman, everything a person writes is going to fuel the fire because of the racial implications and an over agressive neighborhood watchman. When you wrote your first article on this case, I found it to be slanted towards Trayvon even though we did not know all the facts. Normally when you write your articles, you take the middle of the road but not on this one. I was quite surprised to see you taking this stand.
Don't get me wrong here okay? You know how much I admire your writing and it goes way back to Dec/08 when I first happened on your blog. It was your writing that attracted me and I got hooked. (Sorry, it was not your good looks and sweet personality but I wont go there) I am just being honest that your first post on the Trayvon case threw me through a loop.
It is no secret that the post ignited a fire in here and as a result, it created dissension among your contributors. I wonder if some felt that unless they supported Trayvon and gave Zimmeman an iota of leeway, they would be branded a racist and get bashed. I got a taste of it from not just one, but two and just because I wanted to look at both sides of the coin... I wanted to take an unbiased approach.. I am not in the habit of being called honey and someone offering to sell me a bridge and all because I tried to be fair to both Trayvon and Zimmerman. Since I am used to dealing with facts, I will question those who opine and speculate and try to shove it down one's throat as if it were factual. Long rants of superfluous fluff was running rampant in here.
I love Bill Sheaffer and he is who attracts me to WFTV but WESH is my favorite. I will still be checking out their sites.
Hi Snoopy -
It's one thing to slant and it's another to trump up the news. This FBI thing was announced from the start. The Feds were going to get involved to check out the race issue and whether GZ said coon or not. That would make it a hate crime, and the Feds are the only ones to prosecute that sort of thing because it is a federal crime.
Sure, I agree with you that the objective is to write something that grabs the reader's attention, and that extends to all media. WFTV, after all, is a TV station. However, if you're going to write something, make it newsworthy. There was absolutely nothing new in that report and this was my point. What would you say about WFTV reporting that Casey says she might write a book. HEADLINE NEWS! BREAKING STORY! Only, she said it last August. Same with this. It's nothing more than a rehash of what came out in March, and if you really read the whole story, you'd have to admit that the bottom half of it has nothing to do with the headline, and a legal analyst stating that “Mr. Zimmerman could be punished by up to life in prison or even the death penalty,” is a given. Duh.
There's a big difference between reporting the news and what I do as a blogger. I do not slant the news. I openly spin the news, but it's generally after extensive work on a topic. I explain it to the best of my ability, but I make no claim about being a news reporter in this case. If you know my style, you know that I tried to take the reader into the courtroom with me during the Anthony hearings, and that had a lot to do with my early success as a writer. My detail was intimate. One thing is absolutely certain though. I will never make something up to sell my blog. I make no money at this while WFTV makes a ton. It is my opinion that, whether Trayvon threw the first punch or not, had George Zimmerman left his house a mere 10-minutes earlier to go shopping, I never would have had to write my first article. That may be my opinion, but Trayvon is dead and his parents are mourning. Poor, poor George. What about him? Sorry, he made his bed. It's his fault he can't sleep in the same one night after night, but whether he should be convicted of murder or not is up to the court. My opinions lay in the fact that he got out of his truck with a loaded pistol, he was well aware of it, and someone is dead.
Back in 70's our expectations of the news media was to provide us with the basic facts, sans commentary. We saved the commentary for the privileged few respectable ( and almost always white) news anchors of the major channels. I cannot remember his name but I have recollections of one anchor who declared that rock and roll would never last. He was wrong but he only reflected what the pulse of the mainstream wanted.
The media has changed dramatically, and now with the evolution of "news analysts, bloggers and other adjunct media types, I firmly believe that it is no longer reasonable to expect "unbiased" reporting. Reporting now is truncated as each outlet searches for that happy medium.
This blog is the perfect example. I do not come here for the sterile and unbiased "truths". In many cases we never know those truths anyway. Dave provides a unique insight as we saw in the Casey trial and are seeing here. He is unafraid to write an opinion and I can say that he does really try to search for the truth. I come here for the intelligent discourse, information and Dave's perspective. Of all the blogs out there, this has been my favorite for some time now.
Keep your biases Dave along with your quest for the truth.
I must disagree with my good friend Dave on the WFTV thing though. Sure they were pro prosecution but is there anyone here who really does not believe that Casey killed that child? It wasn't so much that they were pro prosecution as much as the evidence was pretty clear.
One thing that I see regarding the Travon case the sterile view that some have placed n the incident. In many I see no compassion the Travon, the human at all. Is this per se racist? No but it does reflect the difference that our society places on a black life.
I truly believe that white America would be intensely appalled id en masse donation to the tune of hundreds of to flowed into the coffers of a person accused of following, say a suburban white teen and killing them for doing nothing except walking. Sometimes it is not the raw racism but the hypocrisy-- but all too often , we verbalize it as racism.
It may well be that Zimmerman may get off here due to legalities. Were that to happen, I would be just as upset as i was on day one--because no teen should meet his or her death at the hands of a zealot when all that teen did was embark on a non criminal walk home.
As to media bias, is the truth FOX News presents any different from the truth from MSNBC or CNN? Personally I never rely on one media as my source of information. I try and watch the all-- putting the pieces together as a whole.
I remember when Walter Cronkite teared up when he heard the news that JFK was dead. I've watched and heard over and over again the sequence of events that led to the Hindenburg disaster; laced with the anguished cries of the news journalist. There are tons and tons of examples of humans acting, well, human. I think it's almost impossible to report the news from any vantage point that's not biased to some degree. After all, reporting the news means going into a neighborhood to record the opinions of those who felt the most impact - the people who live there. As for the the anchor who reported that Rock 'n' Roll would never last... PURE OPINIONATED CONJECTURE! And it has no place in the news. Once again, though, my blog does not report the news. I offer explanations and opinions. Most of the time, I try to be neutral, but not always, and I truly appreciate your thoughts on my writing. I will always be on a quest for truth!
During the Anthony case, it was so obvious that WFTV was extremely biased toward the state. What becomes problematic in that sort of situation is that the stationed painted itself into a corner and couldn't escape. By that, I mean Kathy Belich got absolutely nothing from the defense. No stories at all. Zip. Zilch. Is that the way a news organization should operate? Whatever we felt about Casey's guilt, WFTV jammed it down our throats. Granted, they are hardly like that today, but that's because of a shift in direction. They got rid of one of their schmuck producers who oozed sleaze. Today, the bottom line is nothing like it was in the early days of news. It's no longer news, is it? Isn't it infotainment instead? At the top of the ratings list is WFTV and it's because they sensationalize the news. That translates into higher ratings and advertising revenue, and if we take it in the context of what is considered news today, i.e., infotainment, then they are doing a great job and more power to them. However, the "news" story I wrote about is nothing more than old news, and in my opinion, there's no excuse for that.
I absolutely agree with you on the sterility of this tragedy. It seems evident to me that there is a lot more sympathy for GZ than there is for TM. OK, fine... have a trial, find out the truth, but in the meantime, a kid is dead. A kid without a gun. Hey! He was supposed to be the bad guy. Why was the other guy packing?
Oh, and as soon as there are no more crime stories to write about in Orlando, I may tackle FOX, MSNBC and CNN, but that's the kind of stuff that gets reporters killed.
Thanks, Robert.
Biased reporting has been around forever and I don't imagine it will stop now and it's certainly not limited to one newspaper, station, blog or message board. The 5 W's and H have turned into Who, What, When, Where, Why and HOW much can we make off of the story. It's been around forever... from the political publications of the revolution era to now. We've had so many "trials of the century" that have been covered that we've ran out of centuries. They should change it to "trial of the month" or "trial of the year" instead. I don't think they're trying to influence one side or the other as much as to just gain ratings and sell papers.
They can cover each and every aspect and pimple on Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman but it will all come down to one thing.. George Zimmerman followed an unarmed, doing nothing teenager, who in turn defended himself the best he knew how. If GZ got hurt it was on him. He was where he shouldn't have been. I just hate it that it has probably hurt the neighborhood crime watch programs even to the extent it already has. Crime watch captains don't follow, don't confront and definitely don't carry arms. I don't think it was self defense but I don't think it was first degree murder either. GZ is the instigator and I think they should start taking the focus back off of Trayvon and put it where it belongs.
Yes, biased reporting HAS been around forever. I've always gotten a kick out of people's attitudes when it comes to political stuff in paticular. I know someone who is the most arch, ultra, far-right, conservative Republican I have ever met. When he watches FOX, there is nothing biased about them, but every other news channel is nothing but liberal bias. My point being, of course, is that the audience can miss slants if they don't recognize them, and in many cases, the media organization knows how to cater to a specific audience. This same person thinks WESH is way too liberal and WFTV is not.
You're right about covering blemishes. Trayvon did this, Trayvon did that. Anything to make George Zimmerman look good. I'm not saying he's a downright bad guy, but he refused to use common sense on the night he killed Trayvon. Everything he was taught as a neghborhood watch captain flew out the car window the moment he opened his door and stepped out. For anyone to argue that he wasn't working in that capacity on that night is a fool. He used it as his excuse to go after the kid. Neighborhood watch people don't punch time clocks. He used extremely poor judgement on Feb. 26. No matter what transpired that night, he and he alone put himself in the position he's in today, and he deserves to be punishe for his indescretion. Heck, he killed someone! No, it wasn't like he sought someone out to shoot and kill, but without that gun, his enabler, he wouldn't have gone after Trayvon.
Thanks, Connie.
Until unbiased and truthful eyewitnesses come forward and attest to the fact that Zimmerman chased after Trayvon, it is an uknown. Zimmerman had every right to get out of his truck and walk or even run to see where T went. Did he pursue him after the dispatcher said, "we don't need you to do that?" We think we hear what sounds ( via 911 audio) like Z running after T, the sounds of air. Could this also be heavy breathing into the cell phone? We do not know!
We also do not know the mindsets of either Z or T on that night. Was Z in an over agressive frame of mind and destined to nab one of those a**holes that always get away? Was T pizzed because this strange dude was stalking him for goodness knows what?
Did Zimmerman catch up with Trayvon and corner him so T had no alternative but fight his stalker? Was Z returning to his truck and T snuck up behind him and decided to beat the crap out of him?
Up until the time the autopsy results were made known, it was rumored that Trayvon had no marks on him that would indicate that he punched Zimmerman. Well now we hear differently. Where did the rumors come from? More speculating? Now it is being 'rumored' that Z's doctor made it all up, his nose wasn't broken, no black eyes, all lies.
I am trying my best to be unbiased until we get more evidence to prove or disprove Zimmerman's account of what happened. Sadly, we have a deceased youth who cannot tell us what happened and we have a young man charged with second degree murder in hiding for fear he will end up dead too by the hands of a vigilante.
By being unbiased, we are more apt to get to the truth that will not be slanted from having tunnel vision!!
You all make it so hard to stay away. I rarely watch the same news station, I find if I bounce around the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. It is so frustrating because important decisions need to be made and all the muck between the stations make it difficult. I think the race stuff needs to end. It seems like instead of this being about Trayvon it has to do with his color, how sad is that?!
Snoopy that is the first I heard about fake injuries but I have to tell you when I heard he went to his family Doctor I was beyond shocked. I am positive his brother went on every news station and said his brother went to the E.R. it may sound petty but imo there is a big difference in doctor's office and the E.R. I just hope there is justice found in this mess, whatever that may be for Trayvon.
Dave I hope everything is getting a little easier for your family. xoxo
No need for you to stay away, Laurali, but I wish the race stuff would. It never will. I just wonder if I, a middle-aged man, had been walking along the sidewalk that evening, would Zimmerman have looked at me the same way he looked at Trayvon? Would he have called 9-1-1 and confronted me? I don't know. Had he said "f*ckin' old farts" would that have been age discrimination?
Speaking of old farts, things are a little bit easier on the home front. Thanks for your concern. I hope all is well with you, too! xoxo
I had this post in mind when I read the following MSNBC report on the results of Trayvon's autopsy:
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/16/11736208-trayvon-martin-killed-by-single-gunshot-fired-from-intermediate-range-autopsy-shows?chromedomain=openchannel&lite
******************
Florida teenager Trayvon Martin died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired from "intermediate range," according to an autopsy report reviewed Wednesday by NBC News.
The official report, prepared by the medical examiner in Volusia County, Fla., also found that the 17-year-old Martin had one other fresh injury - a small abrasion, no more than a quarter-inch in size - on his left ring finger below the knuckle.
**************************************
This gives a different impression than several other news reports which state that Trayvon had "injuries" to his knuckles, or "broken skin on his knuckles." Some of these reports go on to say that this indicates that Trayvon was involved in a fight. (I would not be at all surprised if there was a fight between Trayvon and GZ; I have been assuming that something like this happened.)
Is the actual report available? I couldn't find it online. A single, tiny abrasion not on the knuckle might not indicate a fight. (What is meant by "below the knuckle" - and which knuckle? There are three on each finger. I assume that the middle one is what this refers to?)
Does anyone know what is meant by "intermediate range"? I would have thought, from GZ's story, that the gun was fired at close range.
Intermediate range means the muzzle is held away from the skin but close enough that it still produces powder tattooing and numerous reddish-brown to orange-red lesions around the entrance of the wound. It could be a matter of a couple of inches away.
By what I've heard so far, Trayvon's knuckles weren't all banged up like they should have been by Zimmerman's account, and Zimmerman's injuries weren't all thatt life threatening. No concussion, for example, for a guy whose head was being banged relentlessly into the pavement. I hope we get to see more evidence soon.
Thanks, Molly.
Snoopy. By all indications, Travon had no history of violence. Why would a kid who never displayed any violence just "happen" to attack a man with a loaded gun?
Porky3100~~Did Trayvon know that Zimmerman had a 'concealed' weapon before the altercation?
BTW, congrats on making links clickable...lol
We do not know but do you always answer a question with a question? My question remains why would a kid who never displayed violence just randomly attack a stranger?
Porky3100~~your question was, Why would a kid who never displayed any violence just "happen" to attack a man with a loaded gun?
I needed that further information in order to answer your question...
Fine. Lets take out loaded gun. Why would a kid with no prior history of violence randomly attack someone?
Oh yeah I am click proficient now lol
Porky3100~~If a young man had no prior history of violence, he would probably attack a stranger because he was being prevoked in some manner, by said stranger.
Not necessarily. I think fear. By 17, I am sure that he would have been provoked at prior points in his life. This just sticks in my mind like glue--that there was no manifestation of violence in this kid prior to that night. Why then?
Molly, I looked up "intermediate range" for a gunshot wound and it just described it as close enough to cause stipling and a certain type of "ring" around the wound but not a contact wound. It's far enough away that clothes and other things get brought into the wound with the bullet. So the gun barrel wasn't pushed against Martin's chest during the struggle. (that was my take on it). No actual distance was mentioned.
My high school journalism class in the mid-60's advocated unbiased reporting. In the late 60
s and especially during the 70's it all changed to confrontational journalism and "higher ups" in companies were actually taught how to do an interview with Mike Wallace who asked the tough questions. I think what we have now is an evolution of that form of journalism. Sensational stuff sells, unbiased reporting doesn't.
Thank you, Connie. It sounds like "intermediate range" is a lot closer than I thought, and not inconsistent with GZ's story.
Porky, I've wondered the same thing. There have been no reports of Trayvon becoming violent or even fighting before that night. If there had been, I'm sure they would have come out, given how hard certain people were looking for negative information on Trayvon. As you point out, he would have been "provoked" plenty of times. I imagine that he was calm, like his parents.
Molly K. Also note the demeanor of the younger Martin. He too is very reserved and calm.
Anyone of us who steps out at an hour of day where it may particularly be dark and rainy and have someone following us when we know we have no protection such as a metal weapon or bat, would surely be overcome with fear. Also, Trayvon knew he had done nothing wrong in being out there so the only alternative for him to think was that he had someone watching and trailing just waiting for the opportunity to harm him. To be so set on giving GZ the benefit of doubt, I did the same with Casey Anthony, I believed all should wait until facts (?) were considered proof of her guilt. It was very hard to find a spot or "anyone" who would even discuss anything, other than overwhelming thoughts which prevailed , "SHE'S GUILTY" That's it. I do not feel the same in this case, there is no sensible reason whatsoever that Trayvon Martin should have died by the hand of a man who couldn't just stay in his pickup until the authorities arrived. GZ made a deadly misjudgement and then he made a deadly move. There is no way that Trayvon was not in fear. To say "he should not have been fearful" is as cold as ice and imo inexcuseable that our human race would even contemplates such. Trayvon does not deserve to be labeled as dying because he was fearful and
took a stand, as well as he could, against his aggressor who had a gun.
For the life of me, New Puppy, I can't figure out why some people think it's perfectly normal for a guy with a gun to go after a person without provocation. Clearly, GZ did not set out to kill anyone that evening, but just as clearly - because we heard his call to dispatch - he ignored the advice of the police dispatcher. With a squad car en route, what prompted him to take the law into his own hands, although no law had been broken? That,and only that, is what puzzles me. As people sit around defending GZ, I wonder what he actually feels inside. If he had a chance to do it over, would he agree with his fans and say he'd do the same thing again? I doubt it, but then again, it's just my opinion.
Holy Cow. Someone tell me if I am off my rocker but according to this article the reason that Zimmerman sought medical attention from his "personal" physician was to seek permission to return to work. BUT by then he had not even missed a full single day at work and why would he need a medical release for an injury unrelated to his job? This does not smell good at ALL.
Zimmerman sought medical treatment
All of this is going to be a big factor at trial. No concussion = no life threatening injuries to his head. I really want to know the angle of the shot into Trayvon's chest. That will speak volumes.
I would think that a simple telephone call that said I accidentally shot someone and will not be in today would have sufficed at even the most strict employer I would think?
At what point is a mug shot taken? If GZ went to his doctor, did that doctor fix up his nose? It seems there should have been a bandage or some indication, black and blue, swelling, dry blood if his nose was actually broken. If the mug shot was 3-4 weeks later, such injury may not show, but it is thought that the video we have seen was when GZ was first taken into custody immediately after the incident happened yet was clear enough to have detected some distortion in his face of such injury if one was there from having beaten by Trayvon. Will there be an x-ray presented at trial that proves the break in his nose was one as recent as the claimed beating and will subsequent x-rays to show the healing process or could there possibly be some x-rays of a previous injury brought forth and used. Imo will prove a truth or just how far this case can be taken with what appears to be lies to benefit of GZ.
GZ's mug shot wasn't taken until he was arrested and processed at the Seminole County Jail. By then, all injuries were healed. As for the police station video showing his head on the night of the incident, everyone knows how much a head wound bleeds. I had a very small incision on my head once and I was bloody all the way down to my knees. Head wounds always look bad. There were no x-rays taken of his head, either, so that's something the state will press - the lack of evidence of any real injuries.
It is no secret that the post ignited a fire in here and as a result, it created dissension among your contributors. I wonder if some felt that unless they supported Trayvon and gave Zimmeman an iota of leeway, they would be branded a racist and get bashed. I got a taste of it from not just one, but two and just because I wanted to look at both sides of the coin... I wanted to take an unbiased approach.. I am not in the habit of being called honey and someone offering to sell me a bridge and all because I tried to be fair to both Trayvon and Zimmerman. Since I am used to dealing with facts, I will question those who opine and speculate and try to shove it down one's throat as if it were factual. Long rants of superfluous fluff was running rampant in here.
And I am called the one who "just won't leave it alone"? First, let me point out that if you are allowed to continue your snide remarks, then I in turn should be able to respond. Secondly, let me point out two things here - (1) I never called anyone on this blog a racist - if you will look back through the threads, you will find a comment posted by Sherry and directed at me, in which she stated that she was a racist - I responded that "since you are an admitted racist". Plain and simple, I merely conceded to her own statement. (2) "Honey, I have a bridge to sell you" is an old popular song - it was meant as no disrespect to anyone other than someone who was merely looking for a reason to get aggressive and snarky at someone. I have tried extremely hard to ignore your attacks on me simply because I will not concede to your opinions and you refuse to allow me to have my own. You have attempted to twist my words on more than one ocassion, i.e., I never said all attorneys are corupt; there is nothing unethical with an attorney giving (what is going to be otherwise given to the media presumably with his client's permission) an exclusive to a reporter or legal commentator. I will continue to have my opinions and post them here on Dave's blog so long as he says I am welcome to do so. If they do not conform to your opinions please don't try to bully me because of it. As I have asked you to do previously - ignore me and I will ignore you. If you continue to make innuendos concerning me, I will continue to respond. The ball is in your court. Now, let's see if you can "leave it alone." Sorry Dave, All.
Does it strike any as odd that GZ went to a surgeon. Why did he decline referral to the ENT? Was the nose break old and he simply got a bloody nose and two black eyes? Zimmerman also claimed that he was severely beaten, with his head being slammed repeatedly into the concrete. Yet he walks steadily in the police video and as far as I know, never sought treatment for concussive symptoms. I don't think there was ever a CAT Scan or MRI or any thing. Also if someone was slamming your head into the concrete, you might have also suffered injuries to your neck and would require a cervical collar. The absence of these things casts suspicion on major details of GZ's story.
[The fact that there is a lack of evidence supporting GZ's injury claims will work against him. In a court of law, it's all about the evidence!]
Porky3100~ ~Zimmerman was administered first aid in the back of the patrol car by Sanford Fire Dept. Zimmerman was cuffed at the time. Z refused to go to emerg so the second ambulance dispatched to the scene was sent back. I am sure that the paramedics told Z that he would have to make an appointment with his family doctor to get a clearance before he returned to work. Due to the injuries on the back of Z head, this would be precautionary because of the risk of a concussion which may develop as swelling occured later. I do not believe that it indicates that Z had been absent from his employ prior to Feb 26th due to a medical condition and needed permission to return. So Z having never missed a full day of work prior to this has no relevance and you did not catch him in a lie.
Gov't Mule - Ah-ha :-) I'm glad to see you are questioning GZ's injuries much like a juror will have to do come trial. Are his injuries such that it would make you believe that you were "in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm"? It appears that you would not believe so....nor do I. I believe his trip to a private doctor was nothing more than a CYA given the intense grilling he had just underwent at the SPD the night before. He obviously didn't believe his injuries were life threatening enough to accept EMT immediately following the incident and prior to being interrogated by LE.
Now... Can we just leave it alone and move on? No more last words on who said this and who did that? This is a whole new thread and there will be plenty more. PLEASE, let's maintain peace and civility.
Porky - I think that he asked for a doctor's note for his employer because he had no intentions of going immediately back to work and would need it for that reason. As you will recall, it wasn't too much longer after that he and his wife packed up their belongings and moved out of the development to an unknown location.
New Puppy~ ~Zimmerman's mug shot would have been taken when he was arrested and booked in on, I believe April 10th. Since this was over 40 days, after the injuries occured, you would not see any black and blue and any swelling would have subsided. You can have a nose fractured and the swelling will not occur until a matter of hours later. His family doctor said around his nose and eyes was black and blue. He also had brusing under his lip and of course, the small lacerations on the back of his head. He also had a fracture to his nose. The doc did not spell out that this was a new fracture. I hope this helps.
Dave, I like your new banner.
Thank you, Mary Jo. You know me, I get bored easily when it comes to banners. Great seeing you, by the way!
Thankyou for the post Dave and all the commentaters opinions ...
[Hello, ecossie possie! Thank you. It's always a pleasure seeing you here. Please keep it up.]
Porky3100~ ~Zimmerman was administered first aid in the back of the patrol car by Sanford Fire Dept. Zimmerman was cuffed at the time. Z refused to go to emerg so the second ambulance dispatched to the scene was sent back. I am sure that the paramedics told Z that he would have to make an appointment with his family doctor to get a clearance before he returned to work. Due to the injuries on the back of Z head, this would be precautionary because of the risk of a concussion which may develop as swelling occured later. I do not believe that it indicates that Z had been absent from his employ prior to Feb 26th due to a medical condition and needed permission to return. So Z having never missed a full day of work prior to this has no relevance and you did not catch him in a lie.
Snoopy. The very explanation that you give is contradictory as well as highly speculative. Help me understand why a teen is lying dead and at the point absolutely no one knows whether it was murder an accident of whether Zimmerman will be arrested and the emergency people are giving him advice on going back to work? Come on Snoopy.
Dave I have a quick question. Has the medical reports been released for Zimmerman to the public? I found this while reading at NBC. Now I am confused.
Separately, a medical report on Martin’s alleged killer, 28-year-old George Zimmerman, prepared by his personal physician the day after Martin’s shooting in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26, found that the Neighborhood Watch volunteer suffered a likely broken nose, swelling, two black eyes and cuts to the scalp. That report, first reported Tuesday by ABC News, also was reviewed by NBC News.
So did Doctor say nose was broken or likely broken in the report. Did he or didn't he have a broken nose? Likely sounds unsure.....
[Snippets of info have been released, Laurali, piece-by-piece, and the defense isn't doing it. The leaks are intended to make the shooting look like self-defense. As for the broken nose, we just don't know for sure. The most important thing is that, in a court of law, if Zimmerman cannot substantiate his injuries, the state will tear into him. Without x-rays, where's the proof of a concussion, for example. Therefore, he had no concussion. Without the kinds of injuries he claimed to have, how will this evidence work in his favor? Nothing so far looks remotely like he was in the throes of death, like he said, and that's the reason he gave for firing his gun.]
Thanks! The likely threw me off. I mean likely is yes, well maybe no. His brother said if he had not shot he would be wearing adult diapers or something to that effect. But in my medical (unlicensed) opinion this looks like a school yard fight.
However it is best if I reserve judgement until you break down those reports for me, LOL. At least that way I can get your (un)licensed medical opinion. :) xoxo
[My (un)licensed medical opinion and $1.29 will get you a cup of coffee at McDonald's, Laurali... OH! And his brother isn't licensed, either, and his opinion is as one-sided as it gets.]
Hey I sell medical degrees on the side. ok KIDDING! But anyway--Someone just told me that the reason Zimmerman saw his surgeon is because he had a prior injury and that visit had already been planned as a follow up. This is the purported reason why he went to get a doctors note to return to work,. Can anyone confirm this? If this is true, it makes this ever MORE suspect. A physician who is already treating a work injury will absolutely want to delineate which injuries were already present from any "new" injuries. Xrays, MRI and blood work would be essential. Do we know the real he sought this particular Doctor out?
So the news reports are based on leaks? i assumed that somehow the reporters had access to the original documents (autopsy report and doctor's report).
You don't have to have an xray, CT scan, MRI, etc. to be diagnosed with a concussion. There are other symptoms that can tell if you have one or not. I know several people that have had a concussion that never had any xrays, etc. I haven't read if his doctor said he had other symptoms or not, but just wanted to let people know you don't have to have xrays and such.
[I'm fairly certain his doctor told him he didn't have a concussion, but thanks for clarifying whether tests have to be performed in order to be diagnosed with one.]
Prior injury? That would really complicate things. Where did you hear that, Porky?
I have also seen allusions to GZ taking two medications. Does anyone know about this?
Porky where do I send a check for Dave's license? Oh and how much?
Molly I just seen that report about it being leaked. This really reminds me of a road we have been down. I just hope if it goes to trial we will not be hearing about molestation and blah blah blah!
Dave ~ I owe you a coffee.
Molly. I apologize if i did not make it clear but I was not suggesting that the xrays and other diagnostics tests were needed for a concussion. I see two needs for them. Xrays and MRI ton confirm whether his node was broken or fractured. And blood work to determine if he has any internal bleeding from his head being pounded. What do you think?
Molly one of my staff told me about the workman's comp but this is why I was seeking confirmation.
Molly you will have to send cash for Dave;s license. It is not good to accept checks in this line of business :)
Porky, it was Laurali who wanted to send a check, and MaryJo who posted information on tests for concussion. You'll have to work harder on keeping the women here straight!
Laurali, I did not really follow the CA trial. I did read that the child was missing for a month while the mother went about her business, partying, etc., and that she came up with all sorts of stories about her family. Unbelievable!
Molly. oops! Lauri my bad
Porky3100~~ I quote you thus: Snoopy. The very explanation that you give is contradictory as well as highly speculative. Help me understand why a teen is lying dead and at the point absolutely no one knows whether it was murder an accident of whether Zimmerman will be arrested and the emergency people are giving him advice on going back to work? Come on Snoopy.
My explanation is 'contradictory' to what you would like me to say so I will be in aggreement with your assumptions. I agree.
In my explanation, I did 'speculate' when I said that Zimmerman was probably advised to see his own family doctor, by Sandord Fire Dept medics, before returning to work since he did not go to emergency as would be routine under the circumstances.
I do not think it is possible for me to help you understand if Trayvon's demise was a murder or accident for the simple reason, I do not know.
How about this... after Sanford Fire Dept medics assessed Z's injuries, they contacted Sanford, PD and told them that Z should have a follow up with his own personal doctor if he was not going to be booked and held.
pssst....I sell armchair detective degrees on the side... I will be expecting your order..SS
All our thoughts are pretty much speculation, exactly that, in question. It is interesting how we all love the mystery of the unknown. To read comments made as an absolute statement regarding this or that without having had access to more than little fact so far is important to remember that most of our conclusions so far are indeed speculations. We were not there, hopefully just as we were not there at the time of any killing however it happened. I do enjoy mystery, and forgive me, if that sounds like I get my kicks out of the death of anyone, certainly not! In what appears to be a death that certainly could have been avoided we can find added to it every way possible for the perpetrators to excuse themselves. I have read that GZ leaving his truck to pursue was not a violation of his being told "we don't need you to do that" by the dispatcher. There is a clue to my perspective, because I can say he ignored the "we do not need" but I question if the dispatcher has any authority to issue the statement even if it had been a direct order as "DO NOT PURSUE"! May be something which will help determine GZ's intent as he pursued Trayvon. If he had his gun drawn as he followed or if he managed to draw it and pull the trigger while down, OR did GZ stand up, aim and fire? There are so many intricacies to these last few minutes which will have to hinge on position, distance and condition. Trayvon did not have a weapon, and we can say GZ didn't know that, but in my estimation, he soon realized it, so why not just fight it out? Surely this man who believed he was big and strong enough to be a security guard and protect the people could have over come the teenager, and I will say, there is no doubt in my mind that GZ DID know that he was a teenager by the time he got close enough to Trayvon for there to have been altercation. I for one can believe Trayvon was in a state of adrenaline from fear, therefore strong, but a question I have is did GZ EVER, prior to the approach announce that he had a gun and warn this boy that he either "stop or he would fire" Probably not because he was not supposed to be carrying in the first place. This may go against GZ heavily if as a (forgot their title) they are not to carry a gun. GZ may or he has already claimed a surprise attack by Trayvon, still he should have not gotten so close if that is true, he should have announced his approach and that he had a gun, he certainly would have thought Trayvon was near by. Another thing I have thoughts about, where was the gun when authority arrived. I think I read that GZ had it back in his holster, or how ever it was carried. This would indicate (to me only) that GZ's immediate thought was that he had done a good deed and was proud to carry the gun. If I had been GZ and took the steps he did all the while in following and putting myself in the position to be harmed by someone who I had already stated to the dispatcher, "he's got something in his hand" I do not think for one minute that I would do such a pursuit without my gun drawn first. Again, GZ was not supposed to have a gun, was he? IMO GZ, in a moment of hero shot Trayvon, and just for a moment may have felt elation to be the winner. What was his attempt after shooting this boy to revive, to check to see if he was dead, to call for help, to say "geez, you are just a kid" This I would like to know and never will. So speculation, speculation, like a puzzle and pieces are missing. A puzzle can not be completed with any lie, so we can only look at the picture and assume how the finished puzzle would look, at this point. I do enjoy all the what if's, and we must remember that we, even on a blog can mislead others who read by putting 'speculations" out in such a manner as their sounding like fact. I also want to say that I do enjoy reading the comments of new commenters.
Mary Jo, thank you, I did not know it was not necessary to have x-ray for a broken nose. It was my thinking that to heal properly it would be important because there can be different kinds of break, some a clean fracture, nothing misplaced, others can be like a crushed mess I still think it would have been a good thing under the circumstances of this being a case where there was another person involved and that one is dead.
Dave, I do like your banner too!! Being one that reads from left to right I see you first, and that is nice. Of course you look good in blue but I think I like the red better. Guess I will just have to stare at you longer to come to a conclusion. I certainly do like the Title "WE THE PEOPLE" nothing like remembering we do count. NP
[Early on, I spoke with the head of dispatch at SCSO. Dispatchers are private citizens and the only thing they can offer is advice. They have no police powers. GZ would have been wise to heed that advice to stop the pursuit, and for that reason, I believe he lost his right to stand his ground.
I'm glad you like the new banner. I don't know about seeing me first, but yes, We The People does mean each and every one of us. Thanks!]
I just wish if anyone here has a ligitimate degree in medical or investigation they would show and confirm. It is useless to try and communicate a thought and later find I have come up against highly degreed people in most all fields. There is a certain age we reach where we can come to feel like a donkey, dumb and tolerated. But then I console myself by "There being no educational degree higher than living"
Trust me, we all suffer from stupidity to a certain degree. None of us are specialists but we did a great job during the Anthony mess.
This came from bing.... No medical degree here ...
Nose fracture
A nose fracture is a break in the bone or cartilage over the bridge, or in the sidewall or septum (structure that divides the nostrils) of the nose.
Considerations
A fractured nose is the most common fracture of the face. It usually occurs after an injury and often occurs with other fractures of the face.
Sometimes a blunt injury can cause the wall dividing the nostrils (septum) to separate.
For minor nose injuries, the health care provider may want to see the patient within the first week after the injury to see if the nose has moved out of its normal shape.