The Misconception Of A Stand Your Ground Hearing
Thursday, September 6, 2012 at 12:47PM Right after Judge Lester was removed from the bench, Mark O’Mara said he would likely schedule a “stand your ground” hearing sometime next year. On August 31, Rene Stutzman of the Orlando Sentinel wrote:
Nelson will now be the judge who must decide whether Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder, is entitled to immunity under Florida’s much-debated “stand your ground” law, which allows anyone with a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury to use deadly force against an attacker.
Defense attorney Mark O’Mara has said he would likely schedule that hearing next year.
“It will take a tremendous amount of judicial courage at this point to throw the case out following an immunity hearing,” said Winter Park criminal-defense attorney David Faulkner. “My guess is that any judge, Judge Nelson or otherwise, is going to let a jury decide this issue for the benefit of the public.”
Of late, there’s been a lot of discussion and, perhaps, some arguments, over the difference between filing a stand your ground motion and a Motion for Declaration of Immunity and Dismissal. In essence, they are nearly interchangeable; sort of like buying a GM or Chevy vehicle. You can’t have a Chevy without GM, but it doesn’t work the other way around. Without the stand your ground law, there would be no immunity and dismissal motion applicable in this case. In other words, the important thing to remember is that the immunity and dismissal motion is based on Florida’s stand your ground law, F.S. Statute 776.032: Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force, which states:
A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer… As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
Initially, the Sanford Police Department followed the tenets of the stand your ground statute by not placing George Zimmerman under arrest, but that act did not mean he was free from future prosecution. Now arrested and charged, Zimmerman has a right to file the immunity and dismissal motion based on the statute. F.S. 776.012 states:
Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
Right now, we will pay particular attention to 776.012(1) and whether or not Zimmerman was right to believe that firing his gun into Trayvon Martin’s chest was necessary to prevent imminent death. After all, he said he was being pummeled to death by the teen. We will ignore 776.013 because it addresses the unlawful and forceful entering of “a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle…” 776.031 doesn’t apply, either, because it covers the use of force in defense of others.
Before going into F.S. 776.012, it’s important to first mention F.S. 776.041 and the “Use of force by aggressor.”
Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
Here is where some of the confusion may originate over stand your ground and immunity. By most witness accounts, and certainly something the State can clearly establish, the fight did not end where Zimmerman described. Trayvon’s body was found 30-40 feet south of the “T” joining the east/west sidewalk with the north/south one. Witnesses will testify that there was a scuffle with people running and yelling. Who was chasing whom is not relevant at this point because, once able to escape, Zimmerman chose not to. After all, he was the man with the gun. The bottom line is, he cannot prove that Trayvon cold-cocked him there at the “T” intersection. Furthermore, he cannot prove that’s where the fight ended with a bang, as he showed in his reenactment the next day. His best bet is to not bring it up at a dismissal hearing and that means the State will not be able to address it. That’s why, in my opinion, the Defense made an “adjustment” in its strategy, and it’s what led to the confusion over stand your ground and the impending dismissal motion.
At some point, the Defense realized it stood a better chance if it heeded F.S. 776.041. Where the Defense would most likely falter during a Motion for Declaration of Immunity and Dismissal hearing lays in (1) and the first part of (2) in 776.041. Why? In (1), will the Defense be able to factually establish that their client was not the aggressor, who forced himself upon the victim, therefore committing a felony? The shooting at the “T” has been debunked by evidence. The gunshot took place far enough away to establish that Zimmerman’s story is false. If the Defense goes in that direction, so will the State, and Bernie de la Rionda will have every right to do so. And, boy, will he ever!
There’s a big word in (2)… unless, and here’s where it will come into play. Let’s move south. For sure, there was a fight, and since no one can really prove who was on top and who was on the bottom, it’s important for the Defense to lay claim that Zimmerman was on the bottom, being beaten to death. I don’t believe (2)(b) will apply because there’s no testimony by the defendant that he attempted to withdraw. He will most likely assert that his mouth was covered and couldn’t speak, but if he does, the State will counter with the lack of evidence; there was no blood, saliva, or any of Zimmerman’s DNA on the victim’s hands. The Defense will not be able to prove it, any more than it will be able to prove that their client was the one yelling for help. If they try, the State will mention that the screaming stopped immediately after the gunshot while Zimmerman stated that he continued yelling for help as he spread the victim’s lifeless hands away from his torso.
Let’s try (2)(a) instead. Bingo! Here’s Zimmerman’s greatest hope. By claiming, which he has all along, that his life was in danger and that he had exhausted all means to escape, he had no choice but to shoot. OK, fine, but how did he gain access to his gun? The only way to explain it is to show the judge exactly how he did it, and the only person who could do that is George. Without taking the stand, he can’t do that because the video reenactment is too sketchy. If not that, then what’s left?
The medical records.
Yes, let’s just say that Zimmerman did have a fractured nose, meaning broken to some extent. The ARNP who diagnosed him was qualified to do so, and that’s what she wrote in her report:
1. Scalp Lacerations: No sutures needed given well-approximated skin margins. Continue to clean with soap and water dally. We discussed the red flag symptoms that would warrant Imaging given the type of assault he sustained. Given the type of trauma, we discussed that it Is imperative he be seen with his Psychologist for evaluation.
2. Broken Nose~ We discussed that it is likely broken, but does not appear to have septal deviation. The swelling and black eyes are typical of this injury. I recommended that he be evaluated by ENT but he refused.
Review of Systems:
Constitutional Symptoms: Denies fevers and/or chills.
Eyes: Denies loss and blurring of vision, diplopia.
Ear, Nose, Mouth, Throat: Admits nose pain. Denies hearing loss, tinnitus.
Cardiovascular: Denies palpitations, chest pain/pressure.
Respiratory: Denies shortness of breath.
Gastrointestinal: Denies abdominal pain, nausea and/or vomiting.
Integumentary: Admits- (Scalp lacerations).
Neurological: Admits head trauma. Denies tingling, numbness, weakness, headache, dizziness, speech difficulty, gait disturbance, loss of consciousness.
Psychiatric: Admits stress. Denies suicidal thoughts or attempts.
Nothing in that document paints a portrait of a person remotely close to death the day before. Even the Sanford Fire Department EMT report from the night of the incident showed nothing life threatening. Patient Conscious. Breathing normal. No external hemorrhaging. Mucous membrane normal. Extremities normal. Abrasions to his forehead and bleeding/tenderness to his nose. Small laceration to the back of his head. All injuries have minor bleeding. If you combine both reports, it doesn’t help the defense because Zimmerman cannot, in any way, shape or form, establish that he was remotely close to death, and if he tries, he opens a can of worms the State is going to take full advantage of.
§
Back to the matter at hand — the legalities. Enough of the medical. If Zimmerman can factually establish that his use of deadly force occurred under the circumstances outlined in the above statutes, he could walk. Peterson v. State, 983 So. 2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) showed that F.S. 776.032 established a true immunity and not just a justification for what he did. According to the Jacksonville law firm, Hussein & Webber’s website:
The Court stated that, when immunity under the law is properly raised by a defendant, the trial court (at a hearing) must decide the matter by confronting and weighing only factual disputes. Petersen held that a defendant may raise the question of statutory immunity pre-trial and, when such claim is raised, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that immunity attaches. Unlike a motion to dismiss, the trial court may not deny a motion for immunity simply because factual disputes exist.
The main issue in this case will be whether or not Zimmerman will be able to show enough evidence to establish immunity. Once again, I must reiterate what I touched on in The Prince and the Pea: Subjective or Objective Fear in the Petitioner? Was Zimmerman’s fear subjective or objective? Was he correct in fearing for his life or did he just panic? That’s the difference, and there’s a huge distinction between the two and whether or not immunity applies. Of course, there’s one more thing that could only be brought up at trial; did George Zimmerman shoot Trayvon Martin in cold blood? For that reason alone, and for the lack of evidence showing “by a preponderance of the evidence,” Mr. O’Mara had better be preparing his client for trial. I see it no other way.
Cross posted on the Daily Kos
Dave Knechel | in Angela Corey, Bernie De la Rionda, DNA, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, Donald West, Eighteenth Circuit Court, Forensics, George Zimmerman, Judge Debra S. Nelson, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark O'Mara, Motion for Declaration of Immunity and Dismissal, SYG, Sanford, Sanford Police Department, Seminole County, Seminole County Courthouse, Slimm v. Zimm, Stand Your Ground, Trayvon Martin, 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 (437)
Sempre Invictus
The defense is then left with having to put on a self defense case, during which time the prosecution has the opportunity to paint a picture of George as a liar.
Excellent comment. Reminds me of Joe Friday "Just the facts,Mam".
Did I date myself on that one?
At my age,when asked how feel I usually say. I'm this side of the grass and it's better looking down at it,then up at it.
I spent 3 years of my life following and writing about the Casey Anthony case. I attended the trial and wrote about it on a well-respected magazine. One thing I've learned from experience is about how people interact on the internet as opposed to in real life. It opens people up to things they might not say to each other if face-to-face. As a matter of fact, there are people out there who would, quite possibly, become good friends if not for their differences over a particular issue.
I have seen people leave blogs and forums because of the disdain they have created toward other people. I don't want anything like that to happen here. Believe me, I know! I think everyone has something to add, and even if the facts don't quite add up as others see them, comments are still important. All of them.
I was gone for the weekend, but I am back now, so please forgive me for being away for a few days. There's a lot to catch up on, and a lot to learn. Thanks for being patient and, for the most part, very civil to each other. I want it to remain that way, although I know it's tough to do so when ensconced in such an explosive case. We've got to try, though, to keep it from ever getting out of hand.
Dave
@Michelle
What bothers me is you seem to think Trayvon had no reason to defend himself. Or that is how I take your comments.
With all due respect, that is not remotely what I'm saying. Trayvon is not on trial here. If he was (say he survived or something somehow) and was being charged for his assault on George, he would have the same rights to defend himself, and explain why he felt his assault on George was justified.
It very well could have been possible that both individuals were granted immunity due to SYG. It's happened in Florida before (2 guys both shot each other, both claimed SYG, and both were not prosecuted.) Self defense isn't a mutually exclusive state in Florida it seems.
But since George is the one on trial here, his justification to act in self defense is the one that's at issue. And if the State cannot refute the claim that George was on the ground, unable to get away and taking injury until he reasonably believed he needed to use force to defend himself, then George has to be acquitted under Florida law.
@ SnoopySleuth and everybody
Snoopy, honestly I think you are more familiar with the details of this case than myself. So I tend to defer to your knowledge and analysis. At issue presently is how to interpret the absence of Zimmerman’s DNA on Trayvon’s hands. I kind of did not follow your interpretation of that very well.
If I am not mistaken, the police arrived at the crime scene in less than 1 minute (I think about 46 secs) after the shooting, flipped Trayvon’s body over and started reanimating him (while he lay on his back, on wet grass, and not in a pool of running water). Also at that moment it was no longer raining (as the photo of the bloodied head of Zimmerman taken a few seconds after the shooting shows/suggests).
I think we are all aware of Zimmerman’s description of suffocations, the blows, the beatings and torture he received from Trayvon. If Trayvon’s own DNA was found on the surface his hands/in his fingernails but no trace of even an iota of Zimmerman’s DNA, that would mean two things (a) Trayvon’s hands NEVER came into contact with Zimmerman face, mouth, nose, eyes, ears, etc. or (b) any trace of Zimmerman’s DNA was selectively washed off Trayvon’s hands by the non-moving wet grass. I use(d) the word “selectively” because Trayvon’s hands were not immaculate. If other substances were present on Trayvon’s hands (and one does not use luminol to detect foreign DNA at autopsy as suggested by Snoopy), then Zimmerman’s DNA must have been selectively washed off by the non-moving wet grass – if it were ever there in the first place. You, Snoopy, did not consider the first alternative in your assessment, while the last alternative is not possible (IMO).
The autopsy report is very thin for someone like me who needs a lot of explaining to really understand complicated medical stuffs. But I also think it throws us enough bone to chase around (I am not good with jokes).
(And, ya, Snoopy. I was being seriously sarcastic – to provoke your thought. No offense was meant. Your reaction .....).
At issue presently is how to interpret the absence of Zimmerman’s DNA on Trayvon’s hands.
It's hard to interpret much, because still as of now, we have no record of Trayvon's hands being tested for DNA (only scrapings from under the nails), and no record of his hands even being bagged to preserve DNA. We can only guess as to what might have been found on Trayvon's hands had they been tested.
@Bryan,
I agree with you to the extent you said: “it’s hard to interpret much”. I disagree with you when you say: “We can only guess as to what might have been found on Trayvon's hands had they been tested”. If I understand you well, you seem to rule out that Trayvon’s hands were ever tested. I am not yet ready to go that far – because, as you said: “we have no record of Trayvon’s hands being tested for DNA” [yet]. Bearing in mind that not all the evidence has been released and that we might be reading the autopsy report incorrectly, I think we should wait a little longer (if not until the trial) to know for sure. I honestly think it would be jaw-dropping if the medical examiner forgot or neglected to test Trayvon’s hands for any trace of DNA, chemical substances, etc. (given he/she tested the fingernail scrapings of- and drug-tested him).
Furthermore, I do not think that the question whether or not Trayvon’s hands were bagged are particularly relevant (and I will like to know if you think otherwise and why). What is relevant IMO is if there are substances foreing to Zimmerman found on Trayvon’s hands. If yes, Zimmerman’s DNA could not have been selectively washed away from the same hands. That would leave only one option remaining: Zimmerman’s DNA was never on Trayvon’s hands. Once again, I know nothing of medicine. I wonder if you have any academic medical background Bryan. If yes could you explain the autopsy report to all of some of us. I am also wondering if Dave can weigh in with his take on the present bone of contention.
On the side bar, Bryan. Leaving aside the issue of whether or not Trayvon’s hands were tested, what conclusions do you think could be drawn from the absence of Zimmerman’s DNA in the fingernail scrapings of Trayvon, given the suffocations, the blows, de deadly beatings Zimmerman received on his face from Trayvon and the fact that "45% of Zimmerman's face was covered with blood" according to the fire-fighter who testified during the second bond hearing?
The only real conclusion we can draw from the lack of George's DNA under the fingernails is:
Trayvon didn't use his fingernails to scratch George.
That's pretty much all that test tells us.
Intellect
You forgot torture
Intel For some reason I believe that some evidence has been sent to trace, but I do not think anything further has been released as to what they found. I could be wrong, maybe Nan or Snoopy will remember better.
There seems to be a sporadic problem getting into my blog. Hit or miss. I have no idea what it is, but it's not exclusive to this site. I can't access my main e-mail account, either. Hopefully, it will all clear up soon, but in any event, I'm sorry for the inconvenience. Someone asked me if I paid my bill. I said, yes, it's deducted from my credit card every year. A month ago.
And if you continue to lose it, try the real host...
http://marinadedave.squarespace.com/
That will bring you right in and keep you here by bypassing GoDaddy.
Intel~~this is the comment I made. Please read the bolded words. Where did I say that luminol was used during an autopsy? No one needs to get my attention by being sarcastic. Anymore and I will not dignify you with a response.
Going back to the autopsy report. It is a given that Trayvon's hands were thoroughly tested for DNA in the form of blood, saliva and the like. Although it is not spelled out in the report in layperson terms, it is there and maybe we need an expert to interpret it. It could very well be on a FTA card.
If no blood or foreign DNA showed on Trayvon's hands, I can see that happening. The grass was saturated with rain. We do not know how long the grass was. Trayvon was found with his hands underneath him and was lying there for approx 3 hours before the ME removed the body and in the process bagged the hands. There was plenty of time for any foreign DNA to have washed off if it had been present. Trayvon did not land on dry ground and the grass may have acted like a wet sponge. Had the area of the grass directly under T's hands been tested, with luminol, they would have found trace evidence.
I may as well include the blood traces found on Zimmerman's shirt and jacket...taken from my notes...lots of blood splatters from Z's own blood...
DMS-16 Zimmerman's shirt... 14 blood stains-Page 111- Z's blood (JR-2)
DMS-19 Zimmerman's Jacket...16 blood stains-Page 111-Z's blood (JR-2)
DMS-19 Stain 'N'...from 2 individuals..Z's (JR-2) and T's (ME-3)
DMS-19 Stain 'U'...from 2 individuals...T's (ME-3) included as possible.. Z's (JR-2) could not be determined
Dave~~it's okay if you tell them that I was the one who asked you if you paid your rent for this blog. lololol
FYI~~I am also well aware that Trayvon was turned on his back and chest compressions were performed on him. I am unsure how long the remains were exposed to the elements until he was pronounced dead and covered by the yellow tarp.
Dave et al...
This is the reason you cannot access certain blog unless you enter thru the back door of some...
GoDaddy goes down, member of Anonymous takes credit
I remember reading in one of the officer's statement that there was no blood on the gun or it appeared there was no blood. Was the gun tested for GZ's blood?
The reason I ask is because I am not settled in my mind on GZ pulling his gun from his holster while TM was atop him. When I see the nick on the bridge of GZ's nose I wonder if he was not clipped by the gun in a struggle with TM. In my thinking it makes more sense to me that GZ had the gun out of the holster at the T. While there are no witness statements supporting my opinion, in the re-enactment by GZ the next day GZ states he reached for his cell phone which was not where he usually put it, then says no more about the phone. I keep wondering if he was trying to cover the fact he had pulled his pistol at that time. That would explain why TM and GZ ended up in a struggle. imo..
It has taken me a tad bit of time to get my thoughts into understandable sentences .....well, I hope understandable. Not meaning to change or interrupt what is happening with comments right now, I'm just tired of sitting here pondering, pondering and pondering.
Newbie~~your comments make a great deal of sense. I have always wondered if Z went to draw the gun out of the holster and that is when Trayvon intercepted and tackled Z. I don't think Z went for his phone. That is just my opinion. I will take a peek at the forensic report to see if they found any blood on the gun. I remember them saying Z's DNA was on the gun and another foreign DNA but it did not match Trayvon's.
My mail email account is down now and has been for several hours.
* my main email account
Dave,
Thanks again for putting up this post and to all who commented on it. It provided me with some insight into O'Mara's strategy but will be nothing more than a huge waste of time and money. Due to the Sunshine Laws much discovery is out there. That genie's left the bottle and Judge Nelson will send this to a jury. Zimmerman will be out on bond just that much longer.
Disregard my contention that Zimmerman's truck was in motion during most of the NEN call until the truck door opens if it suits you since that's not my my point at the moment.
He admits to following that one time and never since. In all recordings taken that night he claims Trayon sucker punched him and he fell onto his back.
By the next day during his reactment he's aware that doesn't play so he claims he stumbled South a few feet. Disregard that too because it's not where I'm headed. Not once, ever, does Zimmerman admit to defending himself during a fight, attempting to detain Trayvon or even speaking to him except to say "I don't have a problem".
So now we have a fight Zimmerman took no part in. Trayvon must have sucker punched him, dragged him by the ankles for more than 40' (dropping evidence along the way), mounted Zimmerman and pulled not just his hoodie but his t-shirt away from his body so George could shoot him in the chest.
It must have gone down that way since George has no hands and didn't grab both of Trayvon's shirts to restrain him so he could fire his gun! Oh, as as the breath left his body Trayvon's final act was to throw his own cell phone further South and tell his killer "you got me".
Think I'm being facetious? I'm not. This is the entire root of why Zimmerman's stories can never be reconciled. He neither said nor did anything--until he fired that gun.
That's his story, he's sticking to it. Depraved, indeed.
I don't think he was going for his phone either. I think he just threw that in during the re-enactment to cover himself in case a witness saw him reach into his jacket or saw the motion of going for his gun.
Newbie~~
DMS-21 Swabs taken from gun pages 104/105/106 of the first doc dump
George DNA was found but no blood detected on gun that could be determined. George's DNA was on holster. They could not find Trayvon's DNA on gun or holster.. One other DNA was on gun and 2 others on holster but none of those identified.
Thanks Snoopy. I still think GZ pulled his gun prior to TM thumping him if in fact he did. The cries for help show enough fear and stress that I believe it was TM struggling with GM for control of the gun. I'm pretty narrow minded at this point .....just don't believe what GZ states about TM seeing the gun. going for the gun while telling GZ he was going to die. One would have to believe GZ was able to get the gun from the holster while fending off TM.....give me a break.
CoffeeLover, love your comment !
Newbie~~I wonder if Trayvon swung the bag of tea and skittle at Z popping him in the nose and knocking Z off his feet. If he fell near the edge of the sidewalk, that would explain a couple of the lacerations. Trayvon may have used that bag instead of his fists. The tea ended up in Trayvon's pocket but Z may have put it there when he was turning him over. It is a mystery.
That makes sense....tea can....whop !
By the way. I was able to go to marinadedave.com to get on this site but have lost two comments. Flicker as if I entered my statements and then when page appears, nothing in the "post" section. Just to let you and Dave know there seems to be a glitch
Hello Dave. It's gotten busy here. :) I was thinking back, to the photo, taken by the neighbor. I always thought it was a little odd. I found a video of when the photo was released. It was taken 3 minutes after the gun shot, and that I'd forgotten. Makes me wonder how much time he had, before the police showed up. He was handcuffed immediately... I'm going to post this video. Freeze & blow it up around the 23 sec mark. What is he holding up against the right side of his head???? He is definitely not in cuffs. :)
http://youtu.be/6QQf7t4S7ec">
Joanna's link to youtube
It looks like a cell phone to me, Joanna, Thanks for posting that link.
[edit...Dave, I thought you may be resting ...lol
Newbie, thanks back at you :)
I may not be recalling correctly, but thought the Skittles went into Trayvon's hoodie pouch and the Arizona went into the bag. I'm not going back to look right now, but I've thought about that can aplenty, too.
How the can and bag got separated I've no idea. We don't see a 180 degree photo of the can in the crime scene pics, but it looks undented in the pic we see.
If we tried putting a full drink can in a bag and swinging hard at a wall, the can would dent and maybe explode too. But a body part is different, not as consistent as flat surface. Ha. I'm not going to be asking anyone in my household to volunteer while I take a swing at their face with a can of Cola! (Pity)
Snoopy, in my opinion, Trayvon ridded himself of the plastic bag long before the confrontation south of the T. When George was providing his description of Trayvon, he did not mention Trayvon carrying a "loot back" as part of his suspicious character report. I realize that does not mean Trayvon was carrying one, but I don't think he was. I believe the beige bag at the crime scene was likely left by a litter bug, as I don't recall seeing any report of Trayvon's prints being found on that bag.
As for GZ clipping himself in the nose with his gun, if the rain could wash all blood off Travon's hands, why couldn't it wash blood off GZ's gun while it lay in the grass? What I find nearly impossible to believe is that a single punch to the nose would result is a cut. I've seen several people following a blow to the nose, and don't ever recall seeing a cut, unless it was with a hard object. Also, if Trayvon was right handed if his blow was not straight on, wouldn't it have landed to the left side of GZ's nose instead of the right? Unless of course GZ turned away, but then it seems he should have had one heck of a shiner instead.
The again, I suppose Trayvon could have stuffed the plastic bag into his hoodie pocket, and removed it to defend himself when he noticed GZ following him on foot.
I think we should remember that exposure to water and extreme high temperatures destroy traces of DNA (Anthony case). Low temperatures, light rain and blood may be entirely different.
Sempre Invictus,
Agreed there is something odd about the nose, certainly we know Trayvon wore no ring ( in fact no bling, only a watch. And they want to paint him as druggie thug!) So there's a cut/abrasion above his nose and a few tiny scratch marks here and there. It's anybody's guess, I guess.
Coffee Lover~~thanks for letting me know about the skittles going in Trayvon's pocket. I am trying to find the evidence photos to see if the plastic bag was at the scene. I know a neighbor brought the PD a white plastic bag so they could try and seal off the chest wound and do compressions. I like my idea of Z getting a tea bag up the side of his snoot. That could help explain the lack of Z's DNA on Trayvon's hands. The state may not have released all of the autopsy results and possibly holding back the tests done on T's hands.
Okay Snoopy,
But don't forget I'm not rewatching the 7/11 vid tonight to check my recall. I know you'll find the 7/11 bag marked in the crime scene photos though. Along with another plastic bag LE asked for to cover the wound.
Nite
Just a reminder....GZ's friend who has just released a book is on Dr. Phil tomorrow.
The small cut on GZ's nose and the head wounds are strange. Oh, Feb 27 GZ was given Codine (coedine). I remember seeing it with other meds he was taking. Now, as I understand it, codine is given for minor head injuries (read at medical site but can't remember which one). The article or definition also included statement about Codine irritating the intestinal track. If he was pummeled by TM as he has stated, why wasn't a stronger and different pain medication given. And, GZ had been taking two different medications for irritated bowel and he is put on Codine (hmmmm).
Newbie~~If anything, codeine would make Z constipated. Tylenol 1, 2 or 3 has codeine in it.
Codeine
That is the only one they had listed that was close to how they spelled it in one of Z's reports. I know they didn't spell it codeine. It was more like how you spelled it.
@Bryan
“The only real conclusion we can draw from the lack of George's DNA under the fingernails is:
Trayvon didn't use his fingernails to scratch George.
That's pretty much all that test tells us.”
Thank you for your concise but comprehensive answer. I think we are applying the same rules of logic and reasoning along the same line. I would like to take us into the hypothetical to resolve an issue which would definitely be one of the determinants of the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman. The hypothetical question is this:
The surface of Trayvon’s right- and left hand was tested. DNA and/or other substances that were found on surface of Trayvon's hands are all foreign to Zimmerman. What conclusions must necessarily be drawn from this finding?
Strange I posted a comment last night and don't se it here. Wonder where it went? Maybe I just missed seeing it. That's how some older people are.
Getting old is not for wimps.
[I don't know what happens to lost comments. Where do they go? All I can say is to write your comment in something like Notepad. Then, copy and paste it on the blog. That way, if it gets lost, you still have it. Sorry about that, Tommy's Mom, but I have no control over it.]
@bryan I'm glad you like being proven wrong, because you were. You said the witnesses supported Georges story and you were wrong. You said you were USING witness testimony to prove it. And you attached George to it. But you were unable to provide GZ testimony to put HIM there. Thats what I asked for. You couldnt do it. You could have admitted it wasnt there as much sooner, but I know thats not your style. LOL! George SAID never left the T. So his story doesnt fly. I hear now many who visit certain blogs have now 40 something feet is trial. Lets look:
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/18513
Thats pretty darn far away. And his lies are the smoking gun.
My comment about TMs value came from your words and attitudes.
Regarding other incorrect comments, TM's body was covered in crime tarp immediately after CPR was performed. Its in pics, its in witnesses testimony. He wasnt left out in the rain for 3 hours left to elements, as you also implied. And having been turned over, his hands werent underneath of him any longer. I can only think of one reason you'd try to dimish the value of DNA evidience.
John, admitted he didnt see the beginning or end of the fight. Its in his interview. In his follow up interview he said, he was wrong about hitting, and he really didnt see anything. He assumed (I would think, based on being exposed to George's story etc.) He saw arms extended, and after giving it thought he decided that it was just as likely TM was trying to hold off Zimmerman. Why would he even think TM would have a need to detain Zimmerman? Guilt maybe? Realized he got it wrong? Realized TM was detaining the aggressor? Odd thing to say when youre the star witness.Of course he said he didnt really hear George either, and that he assumed that as well. So there really is no star witness. John saw TM on top for a brief moment. Others after, saw George on top. That can happen when you wrestle.
And finger nail scrapping arrent only for scratching residue. They are vessels for all kinds of fluid, fibers hair and anything else they happen to capture. There was no blood or DNA found to supports Georges story. There are injuries, but only a GZ fan would call then life threatening, or consistent with what took place that night (15 hits to the face plus 1 minute of head banging). The lack of DNA, blood, appropriate injury and defense wounds speak volumes! I can assure you if they were there, TM would be toast. Nada, And there wasnt a great deal of time between when they covered TM and then aided George. George was covered in dried blood. TM should have been too. And, I really dont think it was raining at the time.
It is what it is. No star wittiness in his defense. No forensics evidence that proves TM beat GM lifeless. And a sotry that doesnt work. Hmm.
@dave the witness that George talked to after was Joe. Lots of witnesses think his flashlight was the police. He did not immediately come out side, and it happened way after TMs screams stopped, and when George had himself still screaming. The people there all say the screaming stopped at the gun shot. George doesnt. Bryan defense is wrong. By the time Joe arrived George was already up and talking on the phone (per Joe). The struggle was long over.
We'll see if commanding Joe not to call the 911( so that rescue could try and save TM), lying about calling himself (he never did, he called NEN and officer Smith went to the clubhouse and not the crime scene as a result costing precious time) discussing what kind of gun he used to shot the kid, rolling his eyes at police, and not helping the victim all go into the depraved claim by the prosecution.
So what is exactly Manberk making up off the top of his head to claim I've been proven wrong when it's actually not ever happened?
@joanna
He had from the time of the shot to after 7:19:43 before police arrived. Shot was about 7:16:53. Officer Smith arrived at the crime location @ roughly 7:19:40. George had close to 3 minutes alone to work on his story.
Joe, the first person on the scene took the pics. He says in either his 1st or 2nd interview that when he approached GZ he was on the phone. I am sure thats what we see in the pics. He's uncuffed and holding what appears to be a phone to his ear. And Joes testimony corroborates it. He also asked Joe not to call the 911, because he had already done so. He didnt. He called NEN , and that officer who turned out to be Smith, went to the clubhouse where George asked NEN to meet. O. Smith then had to find the crime scene (on foot I believe). Took 2 more mins. Joe also doesnt corroborate Georges version of the story. He mentions nothing about being asked to detain TM. He paints George as matter of fact, and blurting out "just call my wife"( Other witnesses also found Georges behavior odd). They also stood around taking self serving pics of a lifeless body while standing over the dying child, discussing the caliber of the weapon GZ used. And neither ever called an ambulance. Depraved!
If there are questions about the position of TMs body, Joe took the most credible pic, although its within reason to think GZ had time to tamper with evidence. He was seen walking all over the crime scene, even back up to the T. Thats probably when he dropped his keys and 2nd flashlight to make it look like he never left the T, which would be, and is his testimony.
Oddly, he also took a pic of George other flashlight too.The one 50 feet down the T! I cant help but wonder what its relevance is.
Regarding other incorrect comments, TM's body was covered in crime tarp immediately after CPR was performed. Its in pics, its in witnesses testimony. He wasnt left out in the rain for 3 hours left to elements, as you also implied.
This is why I asked you to just quote my entire posts if I have to. You seem to continually get them wrong. I said that he was left out in the rain and wet grass. I'm well aware that after he was declared dead at 7:30 that a tarp was put over him.
And finger nail scrapping arrent only for scratching residue. I didn't claim that they were. However, with no reason to assume that there would be opportunity to get anything under the nails, the only positive conclusion that can be drawn is that he didn't scratch George, which is what I said.
George SAID never left the T. So his story doesnt fly.
Prove it. Show the quote that says he never left the T. (Hint: You can't, you made that up.)
Thats probably when he dropped his keys and 2nd flashlight to make it look like he never left the T, which would be, and is his testimony.
Funniest theory I've ever heard, since 1) There was, ya know, a dead body 40 feet away, and 2) George never claimed that he never left the T.
The location of the skittles, can and bag all strike me as odd as well. We saw TM leave 7/11 with the bag in his hands.
Its also very, very difficult to believe that an assailant, hiding, and returning to start a fight, would do so while chit chatting and making noise talking to his girl and also holding a bag of goodies. The phone was found on the ground. As was the bag. Combined with phone records and the location of the 7/11 bag its not stretch to suggest TM had neither hand available, before his “attack”. The skittles bag was also found with TMs blood on it, yet was in his pocket.
http://www.scoop.it/t/shi-just-got-real
However, TM wasn’t standing up, so the flow of blood didn’t make it that low, according to the pics linked above. Blood flow doesn’t make it past his chest. Yet somehow, everything was retuned to his pockets. Some with blood, some with out. There doesn’t appear to be any access to TMs blood while inside those pockets. Sure doesn’t make one wonder.
@ Bryan:
Remember Gilbreath's statement:
"We have Mr. Zimmerman's statements; we have the shell casing; and we had Mr. Martin's body.
I know you have probably seen this video, but I'll link it here in case anyone else might want to watch it.
YOU TUBE VIDEO |Published on Jun 26, 2012 by LLMPapa | Investigator Dale Gilbreath's Powerful Response
[And LLMPapa is correct. We have two separate locations according to the books of George, and the third location - the TRUE one - where Trayvon's body was found. How can the defense rectify that? Any ideas, Bryan? I'm serious; not trying to be sarcastic at all.]
Manberk: I hope you don't mind. I'll make your link 'click friendly'.
Manberk's link: Shi$ Just Got Real
The biggest issue with this case and the Anthony case is the that all sense of logic and the theories spun by the defendant and the defense,
simply and
plainly
just don't add up!
It's that simple.
Bryan throw out all the evidence you know of and take the story at face value and ask yourself, does it add up?
It doesn't.
Ok so cite lack of specific evidence due to inadequate police work because they accepted the initial story from GZ at face value and you are corect to question the incriminating aspects of such.
But the case does correlate to other high profile cases where things just did not add up, Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson.
Do you believe either of them were NOT guilty of what they were accused or would you cite lack of direct evidence ie the smoking gun?
So while there may be the same likeness in this case, you have to admit that the whole thing just smells fishy.
Undaerstandably so one can not be convicted on a "gut" feeling and sense of illogicality (not sure that is a word but you catch my drift)
So this exactly where this case is heading
John: I appreciate your comment. However, I think you are letting Georgie 'off' to easy. : - )
I believe the evidence for a conviction is strong.
First, it will need a judge to find—by a preponderance of the evidence—that this case should advance to a 2nd degree murder trial.
Then, it will need six people, (maybe the option for 12 is there)--without a personal agenda--to examine the facts.
A guilty verdict should not be that hard.
J4T
"George never claimed that he never left the T."
One thing I will say about the fight at the "T" intersection - Just like George didn't technically" lie when he kept his mouth shut during his wife's bullsh*t testimony, "technically", he didn't VERBALIZE that he "never left the T," but then again, he did. In his reenactment, he most assuredly did claim that the fight started and ended at that T and nowhere else. It's as plain as the nose on my face. If he got his location wrong, that's a brand new set of rules, but you watch that reenactment and tell me where he shot Trayvon. Right there, at that T. Nowhere else.
That's why O'Mara has decided to change his strategy. The fight moved farther south and it debunks his claim of where it ended. Explain George's statement that immediately after the punch, Trayvon jumped on top of him, beat him in that very same spot, and Zimmerman shot him dead by the T.
Believe me, I'm not trying to take sides on this particular issue, but by not saying something, does that mean Zimmerman never implied anything? And he did state that the entire fight took place at that T, and at no time did he infer that it moved south of there.
Dave: Just a reminder to watch the Dr. Phil show today--if you are interested.
If you scroll down at this link, you should find several short clips all from the show.
A Dr. Phil Exclusive: Friends of George Zimmerman -- “The Most Hated Man in America” -- Speak Out | September 11, 2012
[Oh, I definitely plan on watching the show today. Wouldn't want to miss it. Thanks for the reminder, though. I thought it was on yesterday, so I tuned in. WRONG!]
Dave: Yes, I agree with everything you said in your comment.
I think another big problem George has with the location of Trayvon's body, is that it suggests he was following Trayvon. And I think that is why he conveniently got his location wrong.
Once he got to the scene in broad daylight--with law enforcement trailing--he recognized that his story needed a bit of embellishment.
I know there still may be sketches and things to come from the witnesses; and a couple even describe the 'sounds' going from south to north.
And that is interesting.
[The whole thing is very interesting. The oddest thing about his reenactment was that, after he got punched in the face, he stumbled forward. Huh? You don't even need to take a physics course to understand that you'd stumble in the direction of the punch; backwards, in his case. Not so in George's world.]