Thread: Autopsy: Drug THC found in Trayvon Martin's system[W:22, 576]

Google maps, by the way, has it at 2 miles. 4 miles round trip.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=twin+...ie=UTF-8&hl=en

(Twin Trees Lane, Sanford, FL to 101 South Oregon Avenue, Sanford, FL 32771 - the nearest 7-Eleven I could find).

*Edit:

7-Eleven may have removed it from their website. Google has a 7-Eleven here: 1125 Rinehart Road, Sanford, FL 32771 (7-Eleven). This is almost exactly a mile.

Originally Posted by muciti

You are attempting to simplify it. He is adding codeine (a narcotic) with other chemicals to produce a drink that is known to harm people, get you high, and make you more likely to be violent.

BUt you again can twist it however you want. Your warped twists don't change the facts.

Perhaps you should read up on the drink that he was making and tell me if you think it is just mixing a soft drink. But then again, why educate yourself on something when you can be blistfully ignorant of it.

Wait what in the hell are you talking about? Why did Martin's autopsy show that there were no opiates in his system if he was using codeine

And you think codeine makes people more likely top be violent? Let me tell you this very plainly - you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. If I were you, I would stop talking, but apparently you are less ashamed of your ignorance than most people would be. But let there be no mistake, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by muciti

You are attempting to simplify it. He is adding codeine (a narcotic) with other chemicals to produce a drink that is known to harm people, get you high, and make you more likely to be violent.

BUt you again can twist it however you want. Your warped twists don't change the facts.

Perhaps you should read up on the drink that he was making and tell me if you think it is just mixing a soft drink. But then again, why educate yourself on something when you can be blistfully ignorant of it.

So you're saying that Trayvon Martin was high on codeine when this whole thing happened? That's weird, because his autopsy showed nothing but trace levels of THC. It's weird that he was on codeine, because opiates are incredibly easy to identify in drug tests. And what, exactly, is your explanation as to why he didn't test positive for opiates?

Supreme ignorance. You, my friend, have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously. You should quit. Really, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by Mustachio

So you're saying that Trayvon Martin was high on codeine when this whole thing happened?

No, just that he was known to be a user of DXM, not that he was necessarily tripping at the time.

That's weird, because his autopsy showed nothing but trace levels of THC. It's weird that he was on codeine, because opiates are incredibly easy to identify in drug tests. And what, exactly, is your explanation as to why he didn't test positive for opiates?

Because it isn't a given that DXM would show up as positive for either PCP or opiates in a drug screen. A lot has to do with time, and amount since the last usage. An informative site on the subject has this to say...

We have heard speculation that DXM may cause false positives for both PCP and Opiates in standard urine tests. After doing a bit of research on the web we found a small handful of references on the topic. Most of these support the possibility that DXM may cause false positives, but the only peer reviewed journal article refutes that normal doses of DXM cause false positives for Opiates.

Erowid has received one report of an individual who tested positive for PCP a few hours after ingesting DXM.(1) Another report was posted to usenet where an individual purchased and ingested a medium-high dose DXM powder. He ended up in the emergency room where he tested positive for both PCP and Opiates. His conclusion was that the DXM powder he had purchased was not pure, but there is every reason to believe that it may have been pure DXM which caused both of these false positives.(2)

The one peer reviewed study which we found tested normal label recommended cough suppressant doses of DXM. They tested twenty individuals after either 20 or 40 mg doses of DXM and found that none tested positive for Opiates 72 hours later (using EMIT).(3) Obviously this is a significantly lower dose than most recreational users choose. The primary thing this tells us is that it might be difficult to use medicinal DXM use as an excuse for testing positive for Opiates.

Erowid DXM Vault : Drug Testing

Now that doesn't sound to me like it is a given that he would have tested positive in any case.

Supreme ignorance. You, my friend, have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously. You should quit. Really, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Considering what I just posted above with a cursory search on Google, might I suggest that before you come in here and accuse others of
"supreme ignorance" that you possibly take a minute and do a search yourself before you end up looking like you are talking about yourself as you do here....

j-mac

Originally Posted by whysoserious

How is any of that proof? That's like someone posting "I really need to find a way to get more money for these bills", then a bank gets robbed, and so you come on DebatePolitics.com and post about how it was the guy who needed money because he posted it on Facebook. It's not evidence of anything.

He had ****ing Skittles. Get over it. He didn't have a gun. He didn't have crack. He wasn't robbing anyone. If you can't handle that, then that's your problem. Martin, at the time he was being stalked and having the cops called on him, was doing absolutely nothing illegal and you have absolutely no reason to believe he was. Sorry, pal.

Are you serious? That's one piss poor comparison! You want to compare his statements about the preparation of drugs to a statement that generic? Second, show me where in the heck I ever said anything about proof. As a mathematician, I use that word extremely carefully. I'm arguing that because we have strong evidence that the punk prepared drugs prior, paired with having two ingredients for the drug, makes it more probable that was the purpose of the candy and Arizona watermelon drink (not tea).

Originally Posted by muciti

The 711 camera had a time stamp. The 911 call did too. And the house is a measurable distance of .6 miles. 53 minutes passed from the purchase to the encounter and Martin only had .6 miles to travel. That is evidence.

I swear some people on this site think the definition of evidence is "whatever supports my thoughts only"

Yep, and I'm sure it's inconcievable that a technologically sophisticated operation like a 7-11 might not have its security camera synced up to the cesium clock in Denver, right?

So what does all of this add up to? It adds up to nothing. There is NO evidence that Martin was doing anything but buying candy and walking home. And of course all the speculation about his background is absolutely irrelevant unless it evinces a proclivity to violence. AFAIK, there is no such evidence ... except with respect to Zimmerman.

Originally Posted by Mathematician

Are you serious? That's one piss poor comparison! You want to compare his statements about the preparation of drugs to a statement that generic? Second, show me where in the heck I ever said anything about proof. As a mathematician, I use that word extremely carefully. I'm arguing that because we have strong evidence that the punk prepared drugs prior, paired with having two ingredients for the drug, makes it more probable that was the purpose of the candy and Arizona watermelon drink (not tea).

Sorry if I missed it, but what is the supposed evidence that Martin talked about the preparation of drugs?

Originally Posted by AdamT

Sorry if I missed it, but what is the supposed evidence that Martin talked about the preparation of drugs?

I'm not aware of it either. There are claims of some proof from Facebook, but I am not aware of how this conservative website got this info. These assholes aren't exactly froggy when it comes to backing up their arguments with links/data either. LOL

Originally Posted by j-mac

No, just that he was known to be a user of DXM, not that he was necessarily tripping at the time.

Because it isn't a given that DXM would show up as positive for either PCP or opiates in a drug screen. A lot has to do with time, and amount since the last usage. An informative site on the subject has this to say...

Now that doesn't sound to me like it is a given that he would have tested positive in any case.

Considering what I just posted above with a cursory search on Google, might I suggest that before you come in here and accuse others of
"supreme ignorance" that you possibly take a minute and do a search yourself before you end up looking like you are talking about yourself as you do here....

j-mac

Oh you looked at a website so now you are a dextromethorphan expert. Martin was a known user of dxm because one time on facebook he said something like "codeine is a stronger version of dxm." How does that equate to "known user of dxm?" Because he wrote "dxm" on facebook one time? The one instance I've seen that Martin commented on dxm he did so in a context that made it clear that he had absolutely no knowledge of dxm or codeine. And what is the purpose of this conversation? Here's what I find to be an incredibly stupid line of thought: Martin asked on facebook if someone knew where to get codeine, codeine is sometimes mixed with candy and soda, therefore maybe martin was buying candy to make a beverage with over the counter cough syrup? WHAT?! This discussion is so completely absurd. What's the point?

And I have seen firsthand dxm cause a false positive for pcp a number of times, so excuse me if I feel that my knowledge might have slightly more weight than copying and pasting from erowid, which is filled with non-edited non-filtered user submissions.

Originally Posted by j-mac

No, just that he was known to be a user of DXM...

really now?

according to whom?