Zimmerman

[Gadawg73]

Facts are Martin attacked Zimmerman physically first.
Look at his face.

My mind is not made up. I would consider all options.
But look at his face. Take a good look. Trayvon Martin attacked him.
What does that mean to you?

So you are claiming the police doctored the first photo?
You are biased and your mind is made up.
The case has not gone to trial and in your low information mind Zimmerman is guilty.
You remind me of the old south where blacks were convicted before they got to court.
You are doing the exact same thing. A low information citizen that gets their "facts" from TV.

Gadawg aren't you doing the same thing that you accuse Paperview of?

Your previous statements show that you've made up your mind that Martin attacked Zimmerman when in fact there is no evidence that supports that except for Zimmerman's statements as the guy that shot Martin.

And no, a bloody nose does not indicate who threw the first punch. ALL IT SHOWS is that Martin landed at least one good punch to Zimmerman's face. Whether that was the "first" punch or occurred later (say after Zimmerman may have grabbed Martin) there has not been any definitive proof presented yet.

As a matter of record though, for all of Zimmerman's claims that Marin punched Zimmerman repeatedly and grabbed his head to smash it into the ground, there was none of Zimmerman's DNA on Martins hands and Martin's hands had no offensive injuries (except for one small scrape on one finger on one hand) but no scrapped knuckles expected from the type of beating Zimmerman claims.


>>>>

Martin had NO attack marks on his face.
Did he hit Zimmerman in the face after he was shot?
Not what the autopsy report findings are.
Eye witness testimony with Martin on Zimmerman hitting him in the face.
All the physical evidence at the scene indicated that and the police ruled it self defense and did not charge him.
Do not buy into a conspiracy whitey versus darkey cover up that the media hysteria manufactured and the naive and gullible masses have bought into.
I am not biased at all. Will hear testimony on manslaughter charges but please show me how this is a murder in any way. No intent to kill except when attacked. Now if there is an eye witness that says Zimmerman was on top of Martin and Z attacked him first then I would hear the murder charges and consider that.
But none of the physical evidence supports any of that.
Amazing you dispute this clear photo and add credibility that it is faked some how.
No DNA evidence has been introduced as evidence yet. And the DNA evidence that was released, respectfully and I mean you no disrespect was from THE GUN ONLY.
The additional DNA results were that BOTH of them had each others DNA on them. Florida State Crime Lab results 9/19/12 as part of the state's discovery to defense counsel.
That is the record, not what you are claiming.
So you are claiming that Zimmerman beat his face in before police arrived and no one saw him do that.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Martin had NO attack marks on his face.

Which doesn't show who started the hostilities.

Did he hit Zimmerman in the face after he was shot?

No, he was dead.

Not what the autopsy report findings are.

I don't understand?

The autopsy reports show no damage to Martins hands (except for one small abrasion on one finger) which is not consistent with the type of beating that Zimmerman claims. (Not saying Martin didn't get a good shot into Zimmerman's face, I'm saying it's inconsistent with Zimmerman's claims of repeated blows.

Eye witness testimony with Martin on Zimmerman hitting him in the face.

And other eyewitness testimony, had Zimmerman on top.

All the physical evidence at the scene indicated that and the police ruled it self defense and did not charge him.

Actually if you read the police reports the lead investigator wanted to charge him with manslaughter.

State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor

Do not buy into a conspiracy whitey versus darkey cover up that the media hysteria manufactured and the naive and gullible masses have bought into.

I've never bought into the race theory of the media and really don't think race had anything to do with it. Zimmerman left his truck and pursued/followed/chased Martin (that's on tape and his reenactment video), at some point behind the houses they came together and violence ensued.

We may never know what really happened, but the jury will make their call.

I am not biased at all.

Sure you are, you've emphatically stated that Martin attacked Zimmerman, that is a bias toward Zimmerman and a condemnation of Martin when there is no evidence as to who really started the hostilities.

Will hear testimony on manslaughter charges but please show me how this is a murder in any way.

I don't personally think that it was premeditated murder (given the evidence available to the public), I agree that evidence conforms more with you what you suggest, Manslaughter more than murder.

Now if there is an eye witness that says Zimmerman was on top of Martin

There was a witness that said Zimmerman was on top of Martin at the time the shot was fired.

and Z attacked him first then I would hear the murder charges and consider that.

Right now there are NO witnesses (either for or against Zimmerman) that will be testifying as to who attacked who first as there where no witnesses to that event.

But none of the physical evidence supports any of that.

None of the phsyical evidence supports Martin as the aggressor as there is no physical evidence as to who started hostilities. (And no the fact that Zimmerman ended up loosing the fight doesn't mean he didn't start it.)

Amazing you dispute this clear photo...

1. I never disputed the photo, it was the same photo included in discovery MONTHS ago. I've not disputed the validity of the photo, I disagree with what the photo means.

a. The photo shows that at some point in the hostilities Zimmerman was hit in the face by Martin or fell to the ground and hit his face on the ground.

b. The photo does not show who started the hostilities.​

... and add credibility that it is faked some how.

I've never claimed the photo was faked, it's the same one included in discovery MONTHS ago.

No DNA evidence has been introduced as evidence yet.

No evidence has been introduced yet as the trial has not started.

And the DNA evidence that was released, respectfully and I mean you no disrespect was from THE GUN ONLY.

False. The DNA evidence that was release as part of the dicovery included the gun, clothes and Martins hands. Along with the GSR reports that showed no GSR on Zimmerman's jacket on the front fo the sleeves or chest area even though the claim is that Martin was straddling Zimmerman leaning over and bashing his head into the ground at the time Zimmerman discharged his weapon. Given the average length of arms for someone around 6' tall that places there chests 18-22 inches apart at the maximum. Lack of GSR on Zimmerman's clothing then at such a close range is interesting and could lead more to expert testimony that Zimmerman's arm was full extended away from his body when the weapon was discharged. Which would be forensic evidence (physical evidence) which directly contradicts Zimmerman's story.

The additional DNA results were that BOTH of them had each others DNA on them. Florida State Crime Lab results 9/19/12 as part of the state's discovery to defense counsel.
That is the record, not what you are claiming.

State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor

Florida Department of Law Enforcement Forensic Lab Results start on Page 103 of the PDF. Martin's DNA was found on Zimmerman because of the blood spatter, they didn't identify any DNA from Zimmerman on Martin or his clothing.

You know me Gadawg, if you have something more receint from the Crime Lab, I'll appreciate the link.

So you are claiming that Zimmerman beat his face in before police arrived and no one saw him do that.

Not in the least, I'm saying just because there is a picture of a guy with a bloody nose does not mean that the individual with the bloody nose could not have initiated hostilities.

I take a swing and someone and miss and they punch me in the face or I grab them and they punch me in the face and I get a bloody nose. So who was the aggressor? Me because I tried to hit someone and failed or grabbed them, or them because they punched me in the nose.

The photo is not conclusive evidence of anything except that Zimmerman got punched by Martin but provides no indication of who started the fight.


>>>>

 

[squeeze berry]

if Z had killed a white guy all of a sudden the libs would scream racism for his being arrested

 

[Gadawg73]

Martin had NO attack marks on his face.

Which doesn't show who started the hostilities.

Did he hit Zimmerman in the face after he was shot?

No, he was dead.



I don't understand?

The autopsy reports show no damage to Martins hands (except for one small abrasion on one finger) which is not consistent with the type of beating that Zimmerman claims. (Not saying Martin didn't get a good shot into Zimmerman's face, I'm saying it's inconsistent with Zimmerman's claims of repeated blows.



And other eyewitness testimony, had Zimmerman on top.



Actually if you read the police reports the lead investigator wanted to charge him with manslaughter.

State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor




I've never bought into the race theory of the media and really don't think race had anything to do with it. Zimmerman left his truck and pursued/followed/chased Martin (that's on tape and his reenactment video), at some point behind the houses they came together and violence ensued.

We may never know what really happened, but the jury will make their call.




Sure you are, you've emphatically stated that Martin attacked Zimmerman, that is a bias toward Zimmerman and a condemnation of Martin when there is no evidence as to who really started the hostilities.



I don't personally think that it was premeditated murder (given the evidence available to the public), I agree that evidence conforms more with you what you suggest, Manslaughter more than murder.



There was a witness that said Zimmerman was on top of Martin at the time the shot was fired.



Right now there are NO witnesses (either for or against Zimmerman) that will be testifying as to who attacked who first as there where no witnesses to that event.




None of the phsyical evidence supports Martin as the aggressor as there is no physical evidence as to who started hostilities. (And no the fact that Zimmerman ended up loosing the fight doesn't mean he didn't start it.)



1. I never disputed the photo, it was the same photo included in discovery MONTHS ago. I've not disputed the validity of the photo, I disagree with what the photo means.

a. The photo shows that at some point in the hostilities Zimmerman was hit in the face by Martin or fell to the ground and hit his face on the ground.

b. The photo does not show who started the hostilities.​

I've never claimed the photo was faked, it's the same one included in discovery MONTHS ago.



No evidence has been introduced yet as the trial has not started.



False. The DNA evidence that was release as part of the dicovery included the gun, clothes and Martins hands. Along with the GSR reports that showed no GSR on Zimmerman's jacket on the front fo the sleeves or chest area even though the claim is that Martin was straddling Zimmerman leaning over and bashing his head into the ground at the time Zimmerman discharged his weapon. Given the average length of arms for someone around 6' tall that places there chests 18-22 inches apart at the maximum. Lack of GSR on Zimmerman's clothing then at such a close range is interesting and could lead more to expert testimony that Zimmerman's arm was full extended away from his body when the weapon was discharged. Which would be forensic evidence (physical evidence) which directly contradicts Zimmerman's story.

The additional DNA results were that BOTH of them had each others DNA on them. Florida State Crime Lab results 9/19/12 as part of the state's discovery to defense counsel.
That is the record, not what you are claiming.

State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor

Florida Department of Law Enforcement Forensic Lab Results start on Page 103 of the PDF. Martin's DNA was found on Zimmerman because of the blood spatter, they didn't identify any DNA from Zimmerman on Martin or his clothing.

You know me Gadawg, if you have something more receint from the Crime Lab, I'll appreciate the link.

So you are claiming that Zimmerman beat his face in before police arrived and no one saw him do that.

Not in the least, I'm saying just because there is a picture of a guy with a bloody nose does not mean that the individual with the bloody nose could not have initiated hostilities.

I take a swing and someone and miss and they punch me in the face or I grab them and they punch me in the face and I get a bloody nose. So who was the aggressor? Me because I tried to hit someone and failed or grabbed them, or them because they punched me in the nose.

The photo is not conclusive evidence of anything except that Zimmerman got punched by Martin but provides no indication of who started the fight.


>>>>

Once again you post bogus information.
The autopsy report most certainly shows major damage to Martin's knuckles.
Hands? Again, the information you are getting is biased. One hits with their knuckles.
And there is a medical report detailing Zimmerman's broken nose and major lacerations on the back of his head.
I do not believe you think he faked it so who did it?
Where have I ever stated that there is conslusive evidence that Martin started the fight?
There does not have to be, ever. The accused NEVER has to prove anything. EVER.
The burden of proof IS 100% ON THE PROSECUTION. Always. So the burden of proof IS NOT on Zimmerman in any way and he does not have to prove that he was attacked first. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove without a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman attacked Martin first in a murder case which this is.
Manslaughter is a different burden with voluntary and involuntary individually.
But there is a preponderance of the evidence with Zimmerman on the ground and massive damage to Martin's knuckles to show reasonable doubt.
Which is all you need in a criminal case.
And as of now Zimmerman is PRESUMED INNOCENT 100%. As of now Zimmerman is innocent.
But not to many here that have no clue about the law and the presumption of innocence. Their cherry picking of the evidence like the hands, the gun and whatever from what they see on TV and in media trumps that standard.
Zimmerman is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
He has not been proven guilty so he is innocent as of now, no exceptions.

 

[paperview]

Once again you post bogus information.
The autopsy report most certainly shows major damage to Martin's knuckles.

Is this kind of make believe world you live in or something?

The only damage to Martin's hand, was below the knuckle and measured no more than

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4". What world do you live in where THAT is major damage?

 

[Gadawg73]

Once again you post bogus information.
The autopsy report most certainly shows major damage to Martin's knuckles.

Is this kind of make believe world you live in or something?

The only damage to Martin's hand, was below the knuckle and measured no more than

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4". What world do you live in where THAT is major damage?

That is major damage from a fight to the flesh of someone's face.
When were you POST certified and how many years have you been licensed?
How many murder cases and criminal cases have you investigated over the last 30 years?

 

[Gadawg73]

The knuckles are not the hands. Damage to the knuckles is damage TO THE FINGERS.
Know your anatomy.

 

[auditor0007]

View attachment 22890

New ball game.

He will never be convicted because there are no witnesses, at least that we know of. Regardless whether he was getting his ass beat, if he instigated the confrontation and Trayvon Martin was fighting to defend himself, then Zimmerman is still guilty of murder. You can't start a fight with someone and then when you start getting your ass beat, pull a gun and kill the other guy and then say it was self-defense. The problem is that we do not and will not ever know what really happened. Maybe Martin did chase Zimmerman down and just start beating on him. If that is what happened, then Zimmerman had every right to defend himself.

The biggest problem believing that is that Zimmerman was told not to approach Martin, and yet he did. This leads to the assumption that Zimmerman started the confrontation. In the end though, without any eye-witness testimony, or some other direct evidence, assuming what happened is not enough to convict someone.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Once again you post bogus information.

No I haven't, I've posted the autopsy report and Florida Department of Law Enforcement forensic lab reports.

The autopsy report most certainly shows major damage to Martin's knuckles.

The autopsy report starts on Page 125.

"Other Injuries: There is a 1/4 x 1/8 inch small abrasion on the left fourth finger."
State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor


The autopsy report does not say anything about "major damage to Martin's knuckles".

Hands? Again, the information you are getting is biased. One hits with their knuckles.

The medical examiner for the Florida Districts 7 & 24 is biased? I'm getting my information from the autopsy report and the forensic lab results.

Science is no biased.

And there is a medical report detailing Zimmerman's broken nose and major lacerations on the back of his head.

The doctors Zimmerman say did not classify the head wounds as "major" lacerations, didn't even put sitches in.

The report did not detail a broken nose, it suggested the nose was broken but Zimmerman refused the x-ray to determine if it was broken or just swollen.

I do not believe you think he faked it so who did it?

Who did what?

Where have I ever stated that there is conslusive evidence that Martin started the fight?

I didn't say you said there was conclusive evidence started the fight, you have said that Martin attacked Zimmerman. I agree there has been no conclusive evidence presented yet.

Facts are Martin attacked Zimmerman physically first.
Look at his face.

But look at his face. Take a good look. Trayvon Martin attacked him.

There does not have to be, ever. The accused NEVER has to prove anything. EVER.
The burden of proof IS 100% ON THE PROSECUTION. Always. So the burden of proof IS NOT on Zimmerman in any way and he does not have to prove that he was attacked first. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove without a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman attacked Martin first in a murder case which this is.Manslaughter is a different burden with voluntary and involuntary individually.

I agree.

But there is a preponderance of the evidence with Zimmerman on the ground and massive damage to Martin's knuckles to show reasonable doubt.

1. Zimmerman on the ground does not show who started hostilities just alike a bloody nose doesn't show who started hostilities.

2. Read the ME's report, there is not "massive damage to Martins knuckles" there was a 1/4 1/8 inch small abrasion on the ring finger of the left hand.

Which is all you need in a criminal case.
And as of now Zimmerman is PRESUMED INNOCENT 100%. As of now Zimmerman is innocent.
But not to many here that have no clue about the law and the presumption of innocence. Their cherry picking of the evidence like the hands, the gun and whatever from what they see on TV and in media trumps that standard.
Zimmerman is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
He has not been proven guilty so he is innocent as of now, no exceptions.

I agree, guilt or innocence is determined by the jury.


>>>>

 

[paperview]

Once again you post bogus information.
The autopsy report most certainly shows major damage to Martin's knuckles.

Is this kind of make believe world you live in or something?

The only damage to Martin's hand, was below the knuckle and measured no more than

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4". What world do you live in where THAT is major damage?

That is major damage from a fight to the flesh of someone's face.
When were you POST certified and how many years have you been licensed?
How many murder cases and criminal cases have you investigated over the last 30 years?

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4" scratch.



MAJOR DAMAGE

Holy shit. I've received longer scars trimming my rosebushes.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The desire to come to Zimmerman's defense should be cause for alarm for you nuts. I suggest several hours of alone time.....just do some thinking about what motivates you. It can't hurt.

 

[Gadawg73]

View attachment 22890

New ball game.

He will never be convicted because there are no witnesses, at least that we know of. Regardless whether he was getting his ass beat, if he instigated the confrontation and Trayvon Martin was fighting to defend himself, then Zimmerman is still guilty of murder. You can't start a fight with someone and then when you start getting your ass beat, pull a gun and kill the other guy and then say it was self-defense. The problem is that we do not and will not ever know what really happened. Maybe Martin did chase Zimmerman down and just start beating on him. If that is what happened, then Zimmerman had every right to defend himself.

The biggest problem believing that is that Zimmerman was told not to approach Martin, and yet he did. This leads to the assumption that Zimmerman started the confrontation. In the end though, without any eye-witness testimony, or some other direct evidence, assuming what happened is not enough to convict someone.

What is your proof that he started the fight?
Nothing, you have zero proof.
A 911 command verbatim "you do not have to do that" is not a police command of anything. And even if it was then the charge is failure to obey a police command and NOT murder.
He could easily be convicted of involuntary manslaughter now without any witnesses based on his own statement to the police.

 

[Gadawg73]

The sweat shirt Zimmerman had on had grass stains and was wet on the back of it. Defense is trying to get that report released also.
Why is the prosecution fighting over the evidence?
Take a guess why.

 

[Gadawg73]

The desire to come to Zimmerman's defense should be cause for alarm for you nuts. I suggest several hours of alone time.....just do some thinking about what motivates you. It can't hurt.

In The United States of America the rights of the accused are always to be defended.
Something about The United States Constitution, an interesting document that would be worth your while reading.
And who else is there to go to his defense other than those of us that are defenders of freedom and stand behind him with The Constitution in hand as he is presumed innocent.
Don't you stand behind the innocent?
No, you go by TV and media along with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and their bullhorns.
We fight mob rule, never defending it.

 

[Gadawg73]

Is this kind of make believe world you live in or something?

The only damage to Martin's hand, was below the knuckle and measured no more than

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4". What world do you live in where THAT is major damage?

That is major damage from a fight to the flesh of someone's face.
When were you POST certified and how many years have you been licensed?
How many murder cases and criminal cases have you investigated over the last 30 years?

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4" scratch.



MAJOR DAMAGE

Holy shit. I've received longer scars trimming my rosebushes.

Your rose bushes have thorns on them. Zimmerman's face is soft flesh with no thorns.
Damn, do you ever think before you post?

 

[LoneLaugher]

The desire to come to Zimmerman's defense should be cause for alarm for you nuts. I suggest several hours of alone time.....just do some thinking about what motivates you. It can't hurt.

In The United States of America the rights of the accused are always to be defended.
Something about The United States Constitution, an interesting document that would be worth your while reading.
And who else is there to go to his defense other than those of us that are defenders of freedom and stand behind him with The Constitution in hand as he is presumed innocent.
Don't you stand behind the innocent?
No, you go by TV and media along with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and their bullhorns.
We fight mob rule, never defending it.

Oh! Defending that child killer is like defending American values and our Constitution! Now I get it.

The innocent in this case is dead and buried. I stand against the asshole that shot him.

 

[paperview]

That is major damage from a fight to the flesh of someone's face.
When were you POST certified and how many years have you been licensed?
How many murder cases and criminal cases have you investigated over the last 30 years?

this -> -- <- long. 1/8" to 1/4" scratch.



MAJOR DAMAGE

Holy shit. I've received longer scars trimming my rosebushes.

Your rose bushes have thorns on them. Zimmerman's face is soft flesh with no thorns.
Damn, do you ever think before you post?

It's pretty fucking soft. Yeah.

We have ALL had a 1/4 cut on our fingers.

We know punching the face of someone for 20 times results in a little more damage.

Oh, and NO Zimmerman DNA on Trayvon hands or cuffs. Why is that?

And tell me, why was Zimmerman so inept he had nary a single defensive wound?

Notta One.

Fucking pussy. He's got 30 pounds on the lanky kid, and he has pristine hands, pristine presentation on his clothes.

Oh, and remember (maybe you don't) the first words he said to the neighbor, literally SECONDS after he'd killed the kid? Do I have blood on my face?

Yeah, that's the words of someone who who had just been battered, beaten and who knew he had just taken someone's life with his gun.

 

[Gadawg73]

What I find troubling is the lack of any legal understanding of the difference between civil and criminal procedure.
The apartment complex is liable for any and all civil claims as they had Zimmerman as their patrol guy and he has a gun and Martin is killed.
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE is the burden on NEGLIGENCE which is not A CRIME.
And I hope the Martin family gets policy limits or at least a million as premises liability policies usually start at a million. But that is the civil negligence case.
But that has nothing whatsoever with the burden of proof and what constitutes MURDER UNDER THE CRIMINAL CODE of the state of Florida.
From what I have seen and I am open to any and all evidence but to date the presumed innocent accused Zimmerman is presumed innocent not under any theory of mine BUT UNDER THE LAW.
Amazing most of you folks do not even know the laws of this country and how they separate us from the mob rule world.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The sweat shirt Zimmerman had on had grass stains and was wet on the back of it. Defense is trying to get that report released also.
Why is the prosecution fighting over the evidence?
Take a guess why.

The police report stating that there was wetness and grass (not grass stains) was released months ago.

Photographs shows that it was superficial though. I don't see any "grass stains" on the coat from that night.

>>>>

 

[Gadawg73]

The desire to come to Zimmerman's defense should be cause for alarm for you nuts. I suggest several hours of alone time.....just do some thinking about what motivates you. It can't hurt.

In The United States of America the rights of the accused are always to be defended.
Something about The United States Constitution, an interesting document that would be worth your while reading.
And who else is there to go to his defense other than those of us that are defenders of freedom and stand behind him with The Constitution in hand as he is presumed innocent.
Don't you stand behind the innocent?
No, you go by TV and media along with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and their bullhorns.
We fight mob rule, never defending it.

Oh! Defending that child killer is like defending American values and our Constitution! Now I get it.

The innocent in this case is dead and buried. I stand against the asshole that shot him.

All emotion and no substance.
Excused for cause from the jury.