Autopsy Results Show Trayvon Martin Had Injuries to His Knuckles [W:1169, 1244]

[ric27]

The answer to this and your other questions may very well be because they were fighting over the gun.

Wonder if M cut his hand on the gun?

Nope, you are not thinking

*if* (****) they were fighting over the gun...How come there are no marks *fingernail scratches/broken fingernails* on Zim's hands or wrists?

When you fight over a gun, you leave marks

 

[OscarB63]

Not knowing Z's story does make it very hard to make a decision about his story.

It would be notable, imho, if Z's version does not account for this at all.

Iirc, neither RZ nor RZ jr mentioned the chasing bit. Though I did see mention of it from other witnesses recently.

exactly, all we have seen to date are bits and pieces of zimmerman's story. would be nice to see the entire thing to see how it matches up with the known evidence

 

[ric27]

exactly, all we have seen to date are bits and pieces of zimmerman's story. would be nice to see the entire thing to see how it matches up with the known evidence

Zim is not sayin squat until his lawyer ties up all loose ends

 

[OscarB63]

Zim is not sayin squat until his lawyer ties up all loose ends

his original statement given to 5-O should be on record.

 

[ric27]

his original statement given to 5-O should be on record.

Yeah, but remember...Zim's has a (who knows might be another) witness thats retracting key points

In other words, find all the possible plot holes and patch them up

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

And your cover of being a Florida lawyer is blown to pieces. The establishment of immunity via stand your ground law, just like in other areas of criminal law, forces the procecution to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmeran's actions do not fall within the stand your ground law. Quit making **** up and claiming you are a lawyer.

I think the part you are not getting is said establishment of immunity is a pre-trial motion to dismiss. Meaning Zimmerman has to prove the validity of his motion. The burden here lies 100% with the defense. I don't think Zimmerman is going to even file such a motion unless he's very certain the judge will grant his motion because Zimmerman will pretty much have to show his hand (a bad poker move) and let the prosecution know their strategy. If his motion to dismiss is denied, it's a huge upper hand to the prosecution.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Six years ago in Murray v. State, 937 So.2d 277, 279 (Fla. 4th Dist. 2006), the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Florida ruled that once a defendant in a criminal case has introduced proof that he acted in self-defense the jury is entitled to consider the defense, and the jury may not convict the defendant unless it finds beyond a reasonable that he did not act in self-defense.

Which means the case will come down to Zimmerman's credibility and whether or not the jury finds his account believable -- which is shaky at best.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

I thought we were talking about exercising good judgement. both men were entitled to SYG. zimmerman showed poor judgement when he got out of his vehicle to look for martin. martin showed poor judgement when he refused to run on home after he had lost zimmerman. better judgement by either one and martin would still be alive.

some good advice to BOTH of them that night would have been...."don't be a hero"

And both should pay a price. Trayvon paid the ultimate price. Now it's Zimmerman's turn to pay his.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

you'll also notice that it is along the path where one witness claims to have seen one man chasing the other. it is possible that martin attacked zimmerman at the T, zimmerman ran down the path and the fight occurred at that point. :shrug:

As long as we're exploring unfounded possibilities, it's also possible that Zimmerman was chasing Trayvon down the path and Trayvon turned around and clocked him.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

That shot was after the PD and the FD had had their way with the corpse. So, it's related to where the body was found, but I don't know how exactly.

Also, Tracy Martin said that the PD told him that M was found with his feet on the sidewalk and w/ his head in the grass.
There's another account of where the body was found, but I forget the details atm.
One of the many reasons why I think I need to know what Z's story is exactly before I can believe the story or not.

I have not seen an attempt to reconcile the location of the altercation with the version of Z's story that has Z crossing the block to see a street sign and then heading back to his truck.
I wonder what Z's reconciliation of these things is.

Trayvon was dead when they first found him ... I would imagine he was not moved more than flipping him over onto his back in order to attempt CPR.

 

[Born Free]

As long as we're exploring unfounded possibilities, it's also possible that Zimmerman was chasing Trayvon down the path and Trayvon turned around and clocked him.

The problem is there is no facts to support anything.

 

[Born Free]

And both should pay a price. Trayvon paid the ultimate price. Now it's Zimmerman's turn to pay his.

On what grounds?

 

[VanceMack]

And yet again, you are talking about self defense while I'm talking about the Stand Your Ground Law. These are two different things. Stand Your Ground is decided pre-trial by the judge, on motion of the defendant. Self defense is decided by the jury. So Zimmerman will first try to get the case dismissed on SYG, and if that fails, he will argue self defense at trial. Under SYG, the burden is on the defendant. For self defense, the burden is on the prosecution. Aside from that, the difference between the two is that, with respect to self defense, the prosecution can argue that Zimmerman had the opportunity to retreat and failed to exercise it. There is no duty to retreat under SYG.

Might be worth noting that he is not being charged with violating the Stand Your Ground Law...he is being charged with Murder. Unless they are teaching some very screwed up stuff in law schools in Florida and the court system is completely out of whack, there is this thing called the presumption of innocence. The state has to prove he committed murder. He does not have to prove he did not.

 

[Born Free]

Which means the case will come down to Zimmerman's credibility and whether or not the jury finds his account believable -- which is shaky at best.

Yes because there is no evidence to prove otherwise. It's only shaky if the persecution can prove it's shaky with facts. Which they have none. This case will not go to trial.

 

[ric27]

Now it's Zimmerman's turn to pay his.

Finally, you got it off your chest!

Do you feel better, now?

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

The problem is there is no facts to support anything.

Then I suspect the likelihood of Zimmerman's case being dismissed, should he seek dismissal on SYG immunity, is slim. On the flip side, you never know how a judge is going to rule. Case in point was a recent case where a victim of a robbery chased down and killed the robber and the judge granted him SYG immunity because the robber swung a bag of radios at him.

So ya never know? :shrug:

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

On what grounds?

That Zimmerman acted negligently by ignoring both the 911 dispatcher's advice not to follow Trayvon as well as his Neighborhood Watch training to that same effect, by getting out of his car to follow Trayvon.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Yes because there is no evidence to prove otherwise. It's only shaky if the persecution can prove it's shaky with facts. Which they have none. This case will not go to trial.

They seem to think they do. I can see some glaring holes in Zimmerman's defense.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Finally, you got it off your chest!

Do you feel better, now?

Who knows what you're crowing about now -- I am not saying anything now I haven't been saying before. I have felt from the very beginning that Zimmerman should go to jail for shooting Trayvon and I've seen nothing since to change my mind.

 

[Born Free]

They seem to think they do. I can see some glaring holes in Zimmerman's defense.

To see a glaring hole in Z's defense you have to have proof from the prosecution to support your claim. There is none, thinking they have proof is not the same is actually having it.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

To see a glaring hole in Z's defense you have to have proof from the prosecution to support your claim. There is none, thinking they have proof is not the same is actually having it.

Well they say they have evidence that portions of his claims are untrue. So yes, they think there is.

 

[Born Free]

That Zimmerman acted negligently by ignoring both the 911 dispatcher's advice not to follow Trayvon as well as his Neighborhood Watch training to that same effect, by getting out of his car to follow Trayvon.

There is no proof of Z ignoring the 911 dispatcher. And by the sure fact Z may have been keeping an eye on T was his job. Further there is no proof of who said what on the 911 tape, and no proof of who started the fight. There is no proof of anything to convict Z of murder. Nothing, zip zero, nada.

 

[Born Free]

Well they say they have evidence that portions of his claims are untrue. So yes, they think there is.

Of course they say that, but the evidence they "think" they have, may be nothing at all. They may think they have something but to the defense and the jury it may not mean nothing at all.

 

[Tettsuo]

would be nice to know if martin's fingerprints were on the gun

Neither Martin's fingerprints were on the gun nor was any of Zimmerman's DNA under his fingernails.

 

[ric27]

Of course they say that, but the evidence they "think" they have, may be nothing at all. They may think they have something but to the defense and the jury it may not mean nothing at all.

Their tactic is to overcharged, make the defendant piss in his pants in the hopes of a plea-bargain

Knowing well, most Americans cannot afford the costs of long jury trials...so, the majority just cave in and bite the bullet

Absolutely disgusting