It's Watch!... Neighborhood Watch. Not shoot.

OK, I haven't followed this at all, but I've got to admit the discussion here is getting me going. so I looked up the testimony on Zimmerman's injuries.

The prosecution's expert, medical examiner Dr. Valerie Rao, said the head injury was consistent with his head hitting the sidewalk once.


"Are the injuries on the back of the defendant's head consistent with one strike against a concrete surface?" asked prosecutor John Guy

"Yes," Rao said.

"And why do you say that?" asked Guy

"Because if you hit the head one time, it is consistent with having gotten those two injuries at that one time," she testified.

If I'm the defense, I then say, "Once? Once is enough. A blow to the head on concrete can cause death. If someone hits your head against concrete once, would you not think he was trying to kill you? And the next blow could do it."

Also from Rao's testimony (from an ABC News story): She also indicated that abrasions on Martin's knuckles were consistent with him striking someone.

 

I'm sure Martin did strike Zimmerman. I do not believe he was dribbling his head off the sidewalk as Zimmerman said. Or that Martin was covering his mouth and smothering him as Zimmerman also claimed.

I figure it was one punch, Zimmerman hit the sidewalk when he went down after one punch. After that, I don't know.

And I don't know why you're confused by the DNA line. That was testimony from the ME. Not my opinion.

 

I'm not confused by the line, I'm confused by its presentation here. I'm confused by what people are trying to say it represents.

He didn't have DNA on him. So what? Why keep saying it if it doesn't mean anything.

As for the fight, and the details; I'm not sure I'd ever take one of the participants version of a fight as being 100% accurate. Details get fuzzy. And, you do try to portray yourself in the best possible light.

But, I don't think it was a "one-punch" fight.

The prosecution witness testified that Martin was hitting him "MMA style". Does that suggest a single punch?

And, even on the 911 tape, there are screams, right? This suggests to me an ongoing confrontation.

 

MSNBC: Law enforcement asks the judge to announce the verdict on a week day.

Fears of violence and/or the price of overtime?

 

Somebody asked about DNA on Martin's hands. I answered. You fleshed it out.

The witness did say that. But he couldn't say if Martin was landing any punches. He might have been hitting arms. He might have been slapping Zimmerman with open hands.

 

Somebody asked about DNA on Martin's hands. I answered. You fleshed it out.
[/quote]

Maybe I should have directed the question to -- and quoted -- ifilus. He seems to think it means something. You were just the last one to mention it.

He may also have been missing him with several of the punches, and have punched the sidewalk -- hence the knuckles.

But, the next -- or next several -- punch(es) may have landed.

It doesn't really matter how badly his ass had been kicked at the point he pulled the trigger. It matters if he thought he might suffer "great bodily harm" if he did not defend himself.

And, "soft" George Zimmerman didn't have many options to defend himself short of using his weapon.

 

Then why was he there?
This shooting is so troubling. Because the victim is dead, and yes, I see TM as a victim because whether or not he threw the first punch, it seems like GZ's behavior fomented all this, and only one side of the story will ever truly be told. Witness reports are always sketchy, a fact anyone involved in the legal system will say if they're being honest. Did it happen as GZ says? Who knows? People remember things differently than they happened all the time, especially under duress and it's fair to say there was duress.
What this should have become is a referendum for Florida's stupid Stand Your Ground law. GZ abused that law, just like others have. I think if TM was alive and able to tell his story, people would say that he had no choice but to Stand His Ground as well. Isn't it easy to see that he might have felt threatened by this guy following him? I'm not sure how you can discount that that's what happened, because I think seeing a random dude once doesn't give you the idea you are in danger. Despite TM's failings, if a kid smoking pot is such a thing, he doesn't have a violent record.
But instead of honest debate about a law that should be overturned, we get this.
He said/he didn't say cause he's dead, racially tinged crap that can never fully be answered.
GZ will not be convicted although I think he should have been tried for manslaughter, not murder, but justified or not he killed that kid and has to live with that. He will be reviled and beloved, depending on the crowd. TM's parents will never get their son back.

 

That's essentially how I feel about the case, too. The trial is distorting the real story, which is about a tragic convergence of an utterly stupid law and a power-tripping mall cop wannabe who stalked a young black teenager because he was a young black teenager.

The trial means little or nothing to me. The only person standing his ground was Trayvon Martin. There's no question in my mind that Zimmerman was the person who provoked the incident.

 

Why was "who" where?

Which is reasonable doubt. The prosecution has to prove guilt.

This really has nothing to do with "Stand Your Ground". What Stand your ground means is that you do not have to retreat if that is an option (especially in your own home).

But, Zimmerman has claimed a fairly routine case of self defense, which is justifiable everywhere, not just Florida.

Again, Stand Your Ground means you don't have to retreat. The defense claims Martin "jumped" Zimmerman. That's not "standing your ground".

And, for the folks who doubt that Zimmerman could have feared for his life, how can you claim Martin could have?

He didn't know Zimmerman was armed, and surely didn't fear that his life was in danger from a "soft" "creepy ass cracker".

 

And you know this how?

 

Maybe I should have directed the question to -- and quoted -- ifilus. He seems to think it means something. You were just the last one to mention it.

He may also have been missing him with several of the punches, and have punched the sidewalk -- hence the knuckles.

But, the next -- or next several -- punch(es) may have landed.

It doesn't really matter how badly his ass had been kicked at the point he pulled the trigger. It matters if he thought he might suffer "great bodily harm" if he did not defend himself.

And, "soft" George Zimmerman didn't have many options to defend himself short of using his weapon.
[/quote]

If "it matters if he thought he might suffer 'great bodily harm' if he did not defend himself" then how can we know what Zimmerman was thinking unless he takes the stand?

 

If "it matters if he thought he might suffer 'great bodily harm' if he did not defend himself" then how can we know what Zimmerman was thinking unless he takes the stand?
[/quote]Zimmerman is the defendant. He doesn't have to prove anything.