Judge Lester allows Zimmerman to leave county (1 Viewer)

[joko104]

joko wrote: How does that factor in the judge agreeing to allow GZ to travel meet with his out of county attorney?

Joko is the only one who can have sub-discussions (off-topic) in a thread.

Hypocrite much:lol:

I have been noting how some GZ-haters will instantly try to derail any thread with any topic or reality they don't like.

 

[JackFrost]

I have been noting how some GZ-haters will instantly try to derail any thread with any topic or reality they don't like.

I wouldn't say derail...there was a sub-discussion going on and I peeked in a bit.

But oh no, I just showed you an example of the very thing you are calling me out on, and it is okay for you to do it:lol:

Hypocrite much

 

[sharon]

Another DELIBERATELY FALSE MESSAGE by you. It was specifically and criminally illegal for the prosecutor to mail out press release packages with GZ's school records.

It also is a deliberate false claim of yours that the prosecutor, judge and public get to know GZ's conversations with his attorney.

GZ has NO legal duty as you claim to document all his communications with his attorney on his computer so the DA has the possibility to seize it and everyone has the possibly to hack it. But that is what you want of course - calling it "Sunshine."

Education is generally a good thing.

GZ has no obligation to document any of his conversations with his lawyer.. but you don't know what is pertinent or what has been released under Florida's broad public information access laws.

 

[sharon]

I have been noting how some GZ-haters will instantly try to derail any thread with any topic or reality they don't like.

These days many clients consult via Skype... LOLO Judge Lester has been VERY generous towards our gun toting crybby.

 

[joko104]

Education is generally a good thing.

GZ has no obligation to document any of his conversations with his lawyer.. but you don't know what is pertinent or what has been released under Florida's broad public information access laws.

Nice try to change the topic - that YOU raised.
YOU claimed GZ doesn't need to meet with his lawyer to communicate with him, stating he could do so through his computer.
I responded that it is known 1.) anything ever typed on a computer is discoverable by the police and DA and 2.) police and DAs frequently seize computers - thus making ANYTHING GZ sent to or received from his lawyer potentially known to the DA - and 3.) that the DA has proven she will disregard confidentiality laws to issue press releases of confidential material about GZ if she can get hold of it anyway possible - thus making anything communications GZ has with his lawyer not only available to the prosecutor but even appearing on MSNBC and in the New York Times. We also know you would be circulating such legally privileged material.

You then responded that Florida's SUNSHINE laws means that everyone has a legal right to know every word GZ communicates with his attorney and that is 100% absolutely false.

 

[joko104]

These days many clients consult via Skype... LOLO Judge Lester has been VERY generous towards our gun toting crybby.

These days prosecutors in other cases do not use their position to obtain legally protected private information about Defendants and then send it out in press release packages.
These days judges do not declare he knows communications between a defendant and his lawyer and then declare in those secret communications he lied to his lawyer.
There is little about this case that happens in other criminal cases "these days."

 

[SovereignElecto]

These days prosecutors in other cases do not use their position to obtain legally protected private information about Defendants and then send it out in press release packages.
These days judges do not declare he knows communications between a defendant and his lawyer and then declare in those secret communications he lied to his lawyer.
There is little about this case that happens in other criminal cases "these days."

Hey I think it's time you and I both bail on this thread because we are wasting our time trying to argue with people who could care less about facts, laws, or protections and they are only out for blood in what they consider is for sure a hate crime based on race. The sad fact is these same people who are so blind to the truth (facts) and are out for revenge are only helping the system get away with crimes that will one day be used against them.

When their day comes to face the same music they are playing for GZ they will of course be doing a complete turnaround and want others to help expose the truth and to say how unjust it all is. These types make me sick

There simply is no arguing with them, you'd have better chances of holding an educated debate with a brick wall

 

[dolphinocean]

Hi Dolphin, What is your take on t the Paramedic report. Page 181 in discovery on Brady's PCR, states that GZ sustained his injuries by his head hitting the pavement. On the next page which I believe is a station report, he states that the injury was caused by "blunt trauma thrown object" I wonder who told him that? He stated in his oral statement that he didn't attend GZ and the other fire personnel stated that he did not state how he sustained his injuries, said he was very quiet. Thrown object part is very concerning to me.

Hi loje, welcome to DP forum.

In the PCR, Brandy reported what was stated to him in which he wrote, "Pt states he was assaulted and his head was struck on the pavement."

On the next page, Brandy simply entered the blank under "Cause of injury" by filling in the appropriate NEMSIS code for the injury Zimmerman suffered. The NEMSIS code that closely applied to Zimmerman's injury is 9640 which is a code for "Struck by Blunt / Thrown Object". This is a standard description of the cause of injury for rhe code 9640, not that it meant Zimmerman was struck by thrown object.

Here's the source on the NEMSIS uniform code:
　

E10.1 Cause of Injury/Illness

– all of the Codes for the Values changed in accordance with the NEMSIS NHTSA Uniform PreHospital EMS Data Set, Version 2.2. Please see the EMSRB – NHTSA / NEMSIS 2.2 Data Dictionary EMSRB Version 3.0.2. NEMSIS provided the following additional values:

9600 = Motorcycle Crash
9605 = Non-Motorized Vehicle Crash
9630 = Stabbing / Cutting Accidental
9640 = Struck by Blunt / Thrown Object
　
http://www.emsrb.state.mn.us/docs/NTHSA_2-11.pdf

　
But, I agree about Brandy wasn't consistent between his own written report and subsequent representations of the account.

In his PCR he stated that "All injuries have minor bleeding." But, during the bond hearing, if I remember correctly, he testified something like 45% of Zimmerman's head was covered with blood.
　
In his PCR he wrote that ""Pt states he was assaulted and his head was struck on the pavement." But, in the FDLE interview the story changed:
　

He said Zimmerman was pretty silent, and didn’t say anything about how the injuries happened. (4:30) He said nobody asked Zimmerman how he got the injuries.
　
Michael Brandy (Paramedic) | AxiomAmnesia.com Presents They Always Get Away: Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman Documents, Photos, Videos, Audio, and Articles

　
It seems just about everything in Zimmerman's case is just as bizzarre as Zimmerman himself.
　

　

 

[dolphinocean]

Prove its false.....

Where are your witnesses from the night of the shooting to refute that M slammed Z's head into concrete?

Z's version is EVIDENCE backed by proof of his injuries and witnesses observing the, physical attack

Having head injuries alone doesn't automatically prove what he said happened is true.

He could have cut himself during a struggle and sustained those minor injuries without Trayvon having to lay a hand on him except to push him away to get away from Zimmerman's grip.

Z's head injuries are not consistent with his head being slammed repeatedly into the concrete for nearly a minute for the following reasons:

1. You don't pound a head into a concrete for almost a minute and only get two tiny clean cuts that situate up near the top of the head. The two small cuts didn't even require stitches or bandages.

2. If Z's head was truly pounded repeatedly into a rough concrete, he would have a round and bloody meshed soft tissue wound. It would look more like this: victor's head | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

It would not only look like a blooody pounded cube steak but also it should be located at the back of his head where the prominence of his occipital protrusion is located (the center part that jutted out).

But, as seen in the picture below here, the area at the center of his head, i.e. the occipital protrusion, which would be a bloody mess if his head was truly being pounded into the concrete, looks clean and intact without any slightest sign of abrasion. Instead, he only had two tiny cuts sideway to the top of his head above the occipital protrusion. See picture below:

3. Zimmerman's own medical record from his next day visit to his family physician's office noted that Zimmerman did not suffer a head trauma. How can that be with all that head slamming for almost a minute into the concrete?

It's not believable that after such severely head slamming into the concrete for almost a minute, he not only did not suffer any neurological damage, no dizziness, no blurr vision, no loss of consciousness, not stumbling, no brain contusion or concussion and no skull fracture but yet he was the one faster than Trayvon to get to his gun.

If Trayvon was intending to kill Zimmerman, he would have slammed his head so hard into the concrete that just one slam would crack his skull. Trust me, I had seen two cases of skull being caved in relating to gang fights.

4. Your so-called witnesses "observing the, physical attack" is a spurious claim.

Only one witness, known as "John", claimed after the fact he saw such. He later recanted about what he saw regarding the so-called physical attack. In his 911 call he made that night, he did not mentioned seeing anything about who was on top or who was attacking whom. Nothing of that was mentioned. Neither did he say anything to the dispatcher that he was outside before calling 911. In fact, in a nervous chuckle he said, "I'm not going out"..

5. Trayon Martin had no offensive or defensive injury that showed he was involved in a brutal fight with intend to kill a person.

6. Trayvon had no blood or DNA evidence of Zimmerman that showed he grabbed his head to slam it into the concrete repeatedly for almost a minute.

Zimmerman has shown himself to be devious and untruthful.

His versions of event are not only full of inconsistencies and contradictions, but also so scripted as to be impossible to be accepted as believable by any persons of reasonable mind.

Only gullible mind from Zimmerman's supporters would take Zimmerman's words as truth, fact and irrefutable evidence despite all the physical evidence and his own contradictory accounts that proved otherwise.

 

[joko104]

Having head injuries alone doesn't automatically prove what he said happened is true.

He could have cut himself during a struggle and sustained those minor injuries without Trayvon having to lay a hand on him except to push him away to get away from Zimmerman's grip.

Z's head injuries are not consistent with his head being slammed repeatedly into the concrete for nearly a minute for the following reasons:

1. You don't pound a head into a concrete for almost a minute and only get two tiny clean cuts that situate up near the top of the head. The two small cuts didn't even require stitches or bandages.

2. If Z's head was truly pounded repeatedly into a rough concrete, he would have a round and bloody meshed soft tissue wound. It would look more like this: victor's head | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

It would not only look like a blooody pounded cube steak but also it should be located at the back of his head where the prominence of his occipital protrusion is located (the center part that jutted out).

But, as seen in the picture below here, the area at the center of his head, i.e. the occipital protrusion, which would be a bloody mess if his head was truly being pounded into the concrete, looks clean and intact without any slightest sign of abrasion. Instead, he only had two tiny cuts sideway to the top of his head above the occipital protrusion. See picture below:

3. Zimmerman's own medical record from his next day visit to his family physician's office noted that Zimmerman did not suffer a head trauma. How can that be with all that head slamming for almost a minute into the concrete?

It's not believable that after such severely head slamming into the concrete for almost a minute, he not only did not suffer any neurological damage, no dizziness, no blurr vision, no loss of consciousness, not stumbling, no brain contusion or concussion and no skull fracture but yet he was the one faster than Trayvon to get to his gun.

If Trayvon was intending to kill Zimmerman, he would have slammed his head so hard into the concrete that just one slam would crack his skull. Trust me, I had seen two cases of skull being caved in relating to gang fights.

4. Your so-called witnesses "observing the, physical attack" is a spurious claim.

Only one witness, known as "John", claimed after the fact he saw such. He later recanted about what he saw regarding the so-called physical attack. In his 911 call he made that night, he did not mentioned seeing anything about who was on top or who was attacking whom. Nothing of that was mentioned. Neither did he say anything to the dispatcher that he was outside before calling 911. In fact, in a nervous chuckle he said, "I'm not going out"..

5. Trayon Martin had no offensive or defensive injury that showed he was involved in a brutal fight with intend to kill a person.

6. Trayvon had no blood or DNA evidence of Zimmerman that showed he grabbed his head to slam it into the concrete repeatedly for almost a minute.

Zimmerman has shown himself to be devious and untruthful.

His versions of event are not only full of inconsistencies and contradictions, but also so scripted as to be impossible to be accepted as believable by any persons of reasonable mind.

Only gullible mind from Zimmerman's supporters would take Zimmerman's words as truth, fact and irrefutable evidence despite all the physical evidence and his own contradictory accounts that proved otherwise.

This is always such absurd and irrelevant "issue" that is no issue.

Are you seriously claiming that the conflict paused so GZ as a self diagnois doctor could use mirrors to examine himself to determine if his injuries qualified under Florida law as poising serious injury to him if they continued?

It is so absurd and irrelevant to anything and to express extreme desperation.

 

[dolphinocean]

This is always such absurd and irrelevant "issue" that is no issue.

Are you seriously claiming that the conflict paused so GZ as a self diagnois doctor could use mirrors to examine himself to determine if his injuries qualified under Florida law as poising serious injury to him if they continued?

It is so absurd and irrelevant to anything and to express extreme desperation.

Your logic is so beyond the outer limit that no can even fathom where your argument is coming from.

 

[joko104]

Your logic is so beyond the outer limit that no can even fathom where your argument is coming from.

No, your attempts at making absurd arguments over irrelevancies is repetitious.
The medical analysis of GZ's injuries as to seriousness is not the legal question. The legal question is what did he believe about his injuries.

Explain how GZ knew the medical significance of injuries being done to his head?

 

[dolphinocean]

No, your attempts at making absurd arguments over irrelevancies is repetitious.
The medical analysis of GZ's injuries as to seriousness is not the legal question. The legal question is what did he believe about his injuries.

Explain how GZ knew the medical significance of injuries being done to his head?

Debating with you people is like trying to catch a shadow and pin it down. You people are so illusive.

You people kept telling us that Trayvon brutally slammed Zimmerman's head repeatedly into the concrete that caused him to fear for his life and thus his shooting Trayvon to death. When asked for evidence of such without using the killer's own unsupported account, you people turned the table and asked me to prove my case.

When I proved to you Zimmerman's claim is not possible and therefore untrue that Trayvon brutally slammed his head into the concrete repeatedly, you want to dismiss it with your strawman of "The medical analysis of GZ's injuries as to seriousness is not the legal question."

Seriously, you think the legal standard is based on what a killer believed about his injuries? And what kind of logic are you trying to pull by asking me to "Explain how GZ knew the medical significance of injuries being done to his head?"?

 

[joko104]

Debating with you people is like trying to catch a shadow and pin it down. You people are so illusive.

You people kept telling us that Trayvon brutally slammed Zimmerman's head repeatedly into the concrete that caused him to fear for his life and thus his shooting Trayvon to death. When asked for evidence of such without using the killer's own unsupported account, you people turned the table and asked me to prove my case.

When I proved to you Zimmerman's claim is not possible and therefore untrue that Trayvon brutally slammed his head into the concrete repeatedly, you want to dismiss it with your strawman of "The medical analysis of GZ's injuries as to seriousness is not the legal question."

Seriously, you think the legal standard is based on what a killer believed about his injuries? And what kind of logic are you trying to pull by asking me to "Explain how GZ knew the medical significance of injuries being done to his head?"?

That is exactly the legal standard - not whether a medical expert later claimed that the injuries had already suffered were not actually life threatening, therefore no more damage to his head would have been either - as some adsurd theory totally outside of law.

The proof - THE FACTS - are in the smashed face and lacerations to the back of GZ's head. You can claim GZ did all those injuries to himself, but then you prove that bizarre claim.

 

[ric27]

Having head injuries alone doesn't automatically prove what he said happened is true.

He could have cut himself during a struggle and sustained those minor injuries without Trayvon having to lay a hand on him except to push him away to get away from Zimmerman's grip.

Z's head injuries are not consistent with his head being slammed repeatedly into the concrete for nearly a minute for the following reasons:

1. You don't pound a head into a concrete for almost a minute and only get two tiny clean cuts that situate up near the top of the head. The two small cuts didn't even require stitches or bandages.

2. If Z's head was truly pounded repeatedly into a rough concrete, he would have a round and bloody meshed soft tissue wound. It would look more like this: victor's head | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

It would not only look like a blooody pounded cube steak but also it should be located at the back of his head where the prominence of his occipital protrusion is located (the center part that jutted out).

But, as seen in the picture below here, the area at the center of his head, i.e. the occipital protrusion, which would be a bloody mess if his head was truly being pounded into the concrete, looks clean and intact without any slightest sign of abrasion. Instead, he only had two tiny cuts sideway to the top of his head above the occipital protrusion. See picture below:

3. Zimmerman's own medical record from his next day visit to his family physician's office noted that Zimmerman did not suffer a head trauma. How can that be with all that head slamming for almost a minute into the concrete?

It's not believable that after such severely head slamming into the concrete for almost a minute, he not only did not suffer any neurological damage, no dizziness, no blurr vision, no loss of consciousness, not stumbling, no brain contusion or concussion and no skull fracture but yet he was the one faster than Trayvon to get to his gun.

If Trayvon was intending to kill Zimmerman, he would have slammed his head so hard into the concrete that just one slam would crack his skull. Trust me, I had seen two cases of skull being caved in relating to gang fights.

4. Your so-called witnesses "observing the, physical attack" is a spurious claim.

Only one witness, known as "John", claimed after the fact he saw such. He later recanted about what he saw regarding the so-called physical attack. In his 911 call he made that night, he did not mentioned seeing anything about who was on top or who was attacking whom. Nothing of that was mentioned. Neither did he say anything to the dispatcher that he was outside before calling 911. In fact, in a nervous chuckle he said, "I'm not going out"..

5. Trayon Martin had no offensive or defensive injury that showed he was involved in a brutal fight with intend to kill a person.

6. Trayvon had no blood or DNA evidence of Zimmerman that showed he grabbed his head to slam it into the concrete repeatedly for almost a minute.

Zimmerman has shown himself to be devious and untruthful.

His versions of event are not only full of inconsistencies and contradictions, but also so scripted as to be impossible to be accepted as believable by any persons of reasonable mind.

Only gullible mind from Zimmerman's supporters would take Zimmerman's words as truth, fact and irrefutable evidence despite all the physical evidence and his own contradictory accounts that proved otherwise.

Re-read F.S. 776.08.....

Do you what an exchange of equivalents means?

 

[billmaher]

Remember this as a lesson all you confederate bigots from the southern states, you lost the civil war, lincoln and the north spanked you and you had to give up your slaves aw boo hoo, you make me sick, u make me ashamed to be white you racist pigs, the moral is you CANT go shooting black people any more and saying you felt threatened

 

[American]

Remember this as a lesson all you confederate bigots from the southern states, you lost the civil war, lincoln and the north spanked you and you had to give up your slaves aw boo hoo, you make me sick, u make me ashamed to be white you racist pigs, the moral is you CANT go shooting black people any more and saying you felt threatened

Dude, you need to calm down.

 

[joko104]

Remember this as a lesson all you confederate bigots from the southern states, you lost the civil war, lincoln and the north spanked you and you had to give up your slaves aw boo hoo, you make me sick, u make me ashamed to be white you racist pigs, the moral is you CANT go shooting black people any more and saying you felt threatened

Everyone reading that message would know you are white without your saying so.

 

[buck]

Dude, you need to calm down.

I suspect he is trying to be funny by taking the opinions of people like Sharon and Furi to the not too distant extreme.

 

[joko104]

I suspect he is trying to be funny by taking the opinions of people like Sharon and Furi to the not too distant extreme.

Yes, he basically condensed their messages. Sheik, though, wants it clarified that it is Hispanics that are not allowed to shoot African-Americans.

 

[dolphinocean]

That is exactly the legal standard - not whether a medical expert later claimed that the injuries had already suffered were not actually life threatening, therefore no more damage to his head would have been either - as some adsurd theory totally outside of law.

It's not about "whether a medical expert later claimed that the injuries had already suffered were not actually life threatening".

It's all about proving to you that Zimmerman's is a liar, i.e. it didn't happen that way he claimed it happened. Therefore, you cannot depend on his claim about the brutality of Trayvon as if it is an irrefuatble evidence in his defense while turning a blind eye on what the physical evidence actually show.
　
Let me give you an extreme example to get you see the simple basic logic:

　

Let's say a man claimed he shot his attacker in self-defense. He claimed he was thrown down into the concrete pavement from a ten-storey building. Then he claimed the assailant came down through the stairs and got on top of him to rain down punches and slamming his head. Through all that traumatic episode, the man claimed he was still able to notice that the assailant was looking at his gun that became exposed when his shirt came up during his squirming act. But, somehow with all that injuries and being pinned down, he was able to be the one fastest in grabbing his gun first before his assailant did even though his assailant had suffered no injury whatsoever until the gunshot.
　
After the incident, the man suffered no broken bone, no internal bleeding or trauma, no dizziness, no blurr vision, no loss of consciousness, no brain contusion or concussion, and no major wound except two small cuts at the back of the head that were simply cleaned by the paramedics without need of bandages let alone a trip to the ER.​

　

Is that possible?

A person with a reasonable mind will immediately say that the man's story is not possible and thus not believable because his injury or lack of injury is not consistent with his account of falling off a ten-story building followed by a severe beating and head slamming.
　
You and your side, however, will persist to accept the man's story as true no matter how ridiculous the story sounds even though the injury doesn't match the mechanism that was said to cause it. Instead, you, joko, had gone into the twilight zone of absurdity in making a ridiculous argument that it's "not whether a medical expert later claimed that the injuries had already suffered were not actually life threatening."

Instead of using you logical mind to think about it, you simply come up with an absurd argument in a futile effort to dismiss whatever evidence that go against your preconceived belief.
　
Never mind that Zimmerman's story about Trayvon brutally beating and slamming his head is shown to be not possible and thus not true. All you want to do is to disregard physical evidence and reasons in order to stand your ground to defend this proven liar at all cost.
　

The proof - THE FACTS - are in the smashed face and lacerations to the back of GZ's head. You can claim GZ did all those injuries to himself, but then you prove that bizarre claim.

There is no physical evidence to support your so-called "FACTS" about the "smashed face" in Zimmerman. Here is a picture of what a smashed face looked like:





　



Here's the face-shot of Zimmerman taken in SPD the night of Feb 26:
　

　
Tell me, joko, look at the above police picture of Zimmerman taken that night and tell me where's the smashed face? Except for a mild swelling on his nose bridge, I don't see a bruise or a swollen face, do you? He looked the same the next day at the reenactment video as he was the night he claimed he was severely pummeled in the face. He still looked the same the day he appeared in court for the bond hearing and the second one at that.

You simply accept Zimmerman's boogeyman story and see a boogeyman in your imagination when there is none.
　
As to the lacerations to the back of Zimmerman's head, we have been through this over and over again so many times ad nauseam, yet you want to insist having some lacerations on his head is proof Zimmerman's claim being true regardless of the fact that the mechanism of injury and the location of injury do not match the way he described.
　
Zimmerman's claim can be easily put to the test in the court room. Simply ask him to lie down on the floor and gently have his shaved head tapped several times into a large red ink-pad laid on the floor. A round red ink immpression will show on the protruded prominence at the center of the back of his head. It won't show up as a clean linear cut at the top of his head.
　
If Zimmerman's lip is moving, he is lying. And you want to persist to build your case in his defense based on his lies.After all, that's all you have: Zimmerman's lies.

 

[joko104]

It's not about "whether a medical expert later claimed that the injuries had already suffered were not actually life threatening".

It's all about proving to you that Zimmerman's is a liar, i.e. it didn't happen that way he claimed it happened. Therefore, you cannot depend on his claim about the brutality of Trayvon as if it is an irrefuatble evidence in his defense while turning a blind eye on what the physical evidence actually show.
　
Let me give you an extreme example to get you see the simple basic logic:

　

Let's say a man claimed he shot his attacker in self-defense. He claimed he was thrown down into the concrete pavement from a ten-storey building. Then he claimed the assailant came down through the stairs and got on top of him to rain down punches and slamming his head. Through all that traumatic episode, the man claimed he was still able to notice that the assailant was looking at his gun that became exposed when his shirt came up during his squirming act. But, somehow with all that injuries and being pinned down, he was able to be the one fastest in grabbing his gun first before his assailant did even though his assailant had suffered no injury whatsoever until the gunshot.
　
After the incident, the man suffered no broken bone, no internal bleeding or trauma, no dizziness, no blurr vision, no loss of consciousness, no brain contusion or concussion, and major wound except two small cuts at the back of the head that were simply cleaned by the paramedics without need of bandages let alone a trip to the ER.​

　

Is that possible?

A person with a reasonable mind will immediately say that the man's story is not possible and thus not believable because his injury or lack of injury is not consistent with his account of falling off a ten-story building followed by a severe beating and head slamming.
　
You and your side, however, will persist to accept the man's story as true no matter how ridiculous the story sounds even though the injury doesn't match the mechanism that was said to cause it. Instead, you, joko, had gone into the twilight zone of absurdity in making a ridiculous argument that it's "not whether a medical expert later claimed that the injuries had already suffered were not actually life threatening."

Instead of using you logical mind to think about it, you simply come up with an absurd argument in a futile effort to dismiss whatever evidence that go against your preconceived belief.
　
Never mind that Zimmerman's story about Trayvon brutally beating and slamming his head is shown to be not possible and thus not true. All you want to do is to disregard physical evidence and reasons in order to stand your ground to defend this proven liar at all cost.
　

There is no physical evidence to support your so-called "FACTS" about the "smashed face" in Zimmerman. Here is a picture of what a smashed face looked like:




View attachment 67133310
　



Here's the face-shot of Zimmerman taken in SPD the night of Feb 26:
　

　
Tell me, joko, look at the above police picture of Zimmerman taken that night and tell me where's the smashed face? Except for a mild swelling on his nose bridge, I don't see a bruise or a swollen face, do you? He looked the same the next day at the reenactment video as he was the night he claimed he was severely pummeled in the face. He still looked the same the day he appeared in court for the bond hearing and the second one at that.

You simply accept Zimmerman's boogeyman story and see a boogeyman in your imagination when there is none.
　
As to the lacerations to the back of Zimmerman's head, we have been through this over and over again so many times ad nauseam, yet you want to insist having some lacerations on his head is proof Zimmerman's claim being true regardless of the fact that the mechanism of injury and the location of injury do not match the way he described.
　
Zimmerman's claim can be easily put to the test in the court room. Simply ask him to lie down on the floor and gently have his shaved head tapped several times into a large red ink-pad laid on the floor. A round red ink immpression will show on the protruded prominence at the center of the back of his head. It won't show up as a clean linear cut at the top of his head.
　
If Zimmerman's lip is moving, he is lying. And you want to persist to build your case in his defense based on his lies.After all, that's all you have: Zimmerman's lies.

There's not much to say to that because of how wrong it is.
GZ's head wasn't "lightly tapped" and he wasn't laid down on a floor first. Your test is both pointless and bizarre. People have something called a "neck." His head could have been hit against the concrete at any point on the head.
Before any of this, my conclusion was that TM was not slugging GZ, he was slamming him with the palm of his hand. If your goal is to kill someone with facial blows, that is how to do it and the target is the nose, not eyes or jaw.
I think your message is part of the most bizarre one made by GZ haters. To claim his injuries were impossible to have. It is claiming that reality doesn't really exist.
YOU assert that he is claiming the skin on the back of his head was cut by being slammed down on concrete, but he didn't nor could it. That may well have happened as he tried to 'scurry' himself off the concrete with his head pressed down against it. A person can be killed by head injury without skin being cut at all.

As so often, you put words into GZ's mouth he never said, concocts claims he never made to absurdities, and then claim you have disproven his claim and proven him a liar. Actually, all you have done is proven the theory YOU created for him is false. Possibly false.

Actually, I started a thread on the specific topic of a person's head hitting concrete.

 

[dolphinocean]

Re-read F.S. 776.08.....

Do you what an exchange of equivalents means?

How does that support your claim that Zimmerman was severely punched in the face and his head brutally slammed into the concrete? Why evade the debate point at hand?

Florida Statue Chapter 776 is about justifiable use of force. The sub-section 776.08 is about forcible felony.The burder of proof for justifiable use of force and the claim of forcible felony is on Zimmerman, i.e. you in this debate.

I've proven mine, now prove yours without using Zimmerman's claim as irrefuatable evidence.

 

[joko104]

How does that support your claim that Zimmerman was severely punched in the face and his head brutally slammed into the concrete? Why evade the debate point at hand?

Florida Statue Chapter 776 is about justifiable use of force. The sub-section 776.08 is about forcible felony.The burder of proof for justifiable use of force and the claim of forcible felony is on Zimmerman, i.e. you in this debate.

I've proven mine, now prove yours without using Zimmerman's claim as irrefuatable evidence.

You are wrong, but from the start to now GZ haters claim (and themselves do) that GZ is presumed guilty of murder unless he can prove otherwise. Probably that view is because he is Hispanic and there Hispanics are to be presumed guilty. I can't find that in statutes, but am aware some people believe so.

The claim that it is presumed GZ is guilty for which he has to prove he isn't is false and bizarre. Only truly deep hatred, prejudice or political motive could allow a person to even suggest it.

 

[dolphinocean]

There's not much to say to that because of how wrong it is.
GZ's head wasn't "lightly tapped" and he wasn't laid down on a floor first. People have something called a "neck." His head could have been hit against the concrete at any point on the head.
Before any of this, my conclusion was that TM was not slugging GZ, he was slamming him with the palm of his hand.

Not much for you to say because you don't want to take time to read and face the reality of physical evidence and logic.

The lightly tapping of head is not about how a head would take in a severe brutal slam into the concrete. You know the answer, i.e. you won't be getting up fine and dandy without ending in the hospital.

The lightly tapping of head is done to show you where the location of the wound wound be and the shape of the would it would result. Not high up near the top of the head. And not a clean straight line cut.