Enhanced video of Zimmerman in police station appears to show injuries

The thing that gets me here, is that even if Zimmerman did have injuries, what does it prove? It certainly doesnt prove who instigated the scuffle, doesnt prove his life was in danger, and doesnt prove that he was lawful in the shooting.

Ok everyone is missing the big picture. Ok so they were in a fight. Zimmerman got his head scratched. Many people keep saying that he was really in no danger. Well follow me on a hypothetical here for a second.

*****Zman is getting the snot kicked out of him and Tdawg sees the gun and reaches for it. I think this would definitely put him in danger*****

Travon was not some innocent kid everyone keeps trying to paint for us. He had been busted at school for drug possession and for questionable jewelry and screwdriver in his possession at school. He had also been suspended from school 3 times this year alone iirc.

Yes this situation sucks, but from what I have seen it would not surprise me a bit that someone that once referred to himself as a “No Limit Nigga'' (which is known slang for a gang member in the area.) may mess with someone that was following him.

I am not saying what happened needed to happen, nor am I saying it was right, but what I heard on the tapes was Zman being told to go back to his truck and him saying ok. It sounds like most of what he said happened really happened, and the media is trying to paint Tdawg as a model citizen and Zman as a racisist. We do not know what happened, leave it to the courts and pray to whatever deity you want to that justice is served in this case.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
The thing that gets me here, is that even if Zimmerman did have injuries, what does it prove? It certainly doesnt prove who instigated the scuffle, doesnt prove his life was in danger, and doesnt prove that he was lawful in the shooting.

Yes, but who has to prove what?

Everyone is asking Zimmerman to prove his case. Shouldn't it be for the prosecution to prove it wasn't self defence?

What is the legal position in the state where the events occured?

Originally posted by EvillerBob

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
The thing that gets me here, is that even if Zimmerman did have injuries, what does it prove? It certainly doesnt prove who instigated the scuffle, doesnt prove his life was in danger, and doesnt prove that he was lawful in the shooting.

Yes, but who has to prove what?

Everyone is asking Zimmerman to prove his case. Shouldn't it be for the prosecution to prove it wasn't self defence?

What is the legal position in the state where the events occured?

Ive been discussing this in another thread. My contention is thaat in a self_defense case, it is up to the shooter to prove their innocence. They have admitted to the shot. Now they must justify it.

Here's a good bit of information regarding concealed weapons and self defense from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Department of Licensing.

Source

Summary
1. Never display a handgun to gain "leverage" in an argument, even if it isn't loaded or you never intend to use it.

2. The amount of force that you use to defend yourself must not be excessive under the circumstances. Never use deadly force in self-defense unless you are afraid that if you don't, you will be killed or seriously injured; Verbal threats never justify your use of deadly force; If you think someone has a weapon and will use it unless you kill him, be sure you are right and are not overreacting to the situation.

3. The law permits you to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense. Carrying a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman or a "good samaritan."

4. Never carry your concealed weapon into any place where the statute prohibits carrying it.

Emphasis mine on 2. Number 3 is related to Zimmerman's actions, too.

That's not the actual statute regarding self-defense in Florida, but it is what Mr. Zimmerman, as a responsible gun owner with a concealed weapon permit, should know.

Reading this and comparing it to the video tape after the incident, it does not seem to me that he was anywhere near in danger of being killed or seriously injured.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Ive been discussing this in another thread. My contention is thaat in a self_defense case, it is up to the shooter to prove their innocence. They have admitted to the shot. Now they must justify it.

Perhaps I should clarify. Are you speaking as a lawyer or an interested layman? Where does the burden of proof lie, according to statute and/or case law in that state?

For example, in the UK the case law makes it clear that the defendant only needs to provide enough evidence to raise the issue, the burden then falls on the prosecution to disprove it. This is not my contention, it is established law. Are there equivalent statutes or case law in Florida that clarify the position?

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
Here's a good bit of information regarding concealed weapons and self defense from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Department of Licensing.

[snip]

That's not the actual statute regarding self-defense in Florida, but it is what Mr. Zimmerman, as a responsible gun owner with a concealed weapon permit, should know.

Reading this and comparing it to the video tape after the incident, it does not seem to me that he was anywhere near in danger of being killed or seriously injured.

The issue I have with that, is that the "official" version is often not exactly the legal position, especially in self defence cases. According ot the police here, you should smile and offer up the keys to your house to any thug who looks at you in a scary way, though that certainly isn't the legal position.

The other issue is whether Zimmerman believed he was in danger. Again, is there Florida statute or caselaw that sets out the position? In the UK, if it was reasonable for him to believe it at the time then that is the key thing, even if in the cold light of day it turns out he was wrong.

Originally posted by EvillerBob
Where does the burden of proof lie, according to statute and/or case law in that state?

I'll try and help you with that question EvillerBob.

Some say that the "Stand Your Ground" law makes it exceptionally hard to win a conviction. First, some have pointed out that, in Florida, the prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense, assuming the defendant has adduced sufficient evidence to present a jury question.

prawfsblawg.blogs.com

And there is also a snippet that explains rather plainly the "stand your ground" law:

So what is truly distinctive about Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law? It is this: while self-defense conventionally is just that -- a defense, to be raised at trial -- self-defense under the Florida law acts as an immunity from prosecution or even arrest. Section 776.032 of the Florida Statutes provides that a person who uses deadly force in self-defense "is immune from criminal prosecution." This odd provision means that a person who uses deadly force in self-defense cannot be tried, even though the highly fact-intensive question of whether the person acted in self-defense is usually hashed out at trial.

prawfsblawg.blogs.com


Hope that helps!!
OiO

Originally posted by subject1145
Travon was not some innocent kid everyone keeps trying to paint for us. He had been busted at school for drug possession and for questionable jewelry and screwdriver in his possession at school. He had also been suspended from school 3 times this year alone iirc.

Yes this situation sucks, but from what I have seen it would not surprise me a bit that someone that once referred to himself as a “No Limit Nigga'' (which is known slang for a gang member in the area.) may mess with someone that was following him.

I am not saying what happened needed to happen, nor am I saying it was right, but what I heard on the tapes was Zman being told to go back to his truck and him saying ok. It sounds like most of what he said happened really happened, and the media is trying to paint Tdawg as a model citizen and Zman as a racisist. We do not know what happened, leave it to the courts and pray to whatever deity you want to that justice is served in this case.

Oh, and Zimmerman was a spotless, model citizen? Its hypocritical how you are calling the media "biased" for "trying to paint Tdawg as a model citizen and Zman as a racisist"....

Then YOU go and only post the negative history from Martin, but don't say a word about Zimmermans violent history.

But hey here it is:
"was fired from a job securing illegal house parties for “being too aggressive,”

"“One time this woman was acting a little out of control. She was drunk. George lost his cool and totally overreacted,” he said. “It was weird, because he was such a cool guy, but he got all nuts. He picked her up and threw her. It was pure rage. She twisted her ankle. Everyone was flipping out.”"

"a 2005 arrest on charges of resisting arrest and assaulting a law enforcement officer. The charges were later dropped."

"According to the Miami Herald, Zuazo said that three years earlier, Zimmerman attacked her while the two were driving to a counseling session. Zuazo said she popped her gum in his face and he repeatedly smacked her in the face. In January 2002, she added, Zimmerman became enraged that she had come home late. They wrestled and he threw her on the bed, smacking her, according to the newspaper"

So, there at least both sides history is out there now.

No one has answered my question yet. How far away from the truck was Martin found? I had read that martin jumped Zimmerman, while Zimmerman was getting back into his truck. The wounds appear not on the lower occiput, but towards the upper part of the occiput.

Additionally, I think that there would be bruising on the parietal and temporal regions where the 17 year old Martin would have gripped Mr Zimmerman's head. Perhaps that is why Mr Zimmerman's ears are deformed (from swelling).

Originally posted by OneisOne

Originally posted by EvillerBob
Where does the burden of proof lie, according to statute and/or case law in that state?

I'll try and help you with that question EvillerBob.

[snip]

Hope that helps!!

That is a massive help, thank you. So now, instead of us trying to guess what will happen based on how we think the law should work, we can look at what needs to be done to work within the law as it stands. Straight away we're miles ahead of nearly any other thread on the internet about this subject! This is "denying ignorance" at its best

The "stand your ground" law is fascinating and I wonder how much case law exists around it. I could see that "clear cut" cases of self defence might benefit from a bar to prosecution (armed burglar shot by homeowner, etc) but how does Florida reconcile the immunity with unclear cases? From the article, it doesn't, but surely this matter has come to court previously.

Even leaving that hurdle aside, we are left with the central position at law - Zimmerman simply needs to raise enough evidence to put self defence forward. Between his statement and the witness statement placing Martin on top, would you say that burden has been discharged?

Is there a difference between Florida's stand your ground and self defense laws? I thought I read (and am NOT taking it as anything but rumor) that Zimmmerman's attorney said stand your ground wouldn't work with his case and therefore, he would be going for self defense. I swore I read an article but I can't find it now.

I honestly don't know. just asking. If anyone could clarify, that'd be great.

Originally posted by Violater1
No one has answered my question yet. How far away from the truck was Martin found?

I don't know but it would be interesting to find out - along with identifying where the actual shooting took place. There's no guarantee that the body was at the same location as the shooting.

reply to post by EvillerBob


Considering witnesses claim they were outside right away and were witnessing the very last seconds, I don't believe Zimmerman had time or even tried to move Martin's body.

reply to post by Violater1


wow - someone really did polish a turd

if zimmermann was injured on arrival @ the police station - i would expect that it would be std procedure to document these injuries both photographically and on the custody suite forms [ it is in the UK ]

i would prefer to see that evidence rather than attempts at turd polishing

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
Is there a difference between Florida's stand your ground and self defense laws? I thought I read (and am NOT taking it as anything but rumor) that Zimmmerman's attorney said stand your ground wouldn't work with his case and therefore, he would be going for self defense. I swore I read an article but I can't find it now.

I honestly don't know. just asking. If anyone could clarify, that'd be great.

It sounds as if the "self defense" provision comes into play as a defence in court when you are prosecuted. "Stand your ground" is designed to prevent a self defence case even going to court. The problem is that many self defence cases are heavily disputed and hard to unravel, so how is it fair for the shooter to avoid explaining himself in court just by claiming self defence"?

I suspect - and this might explain why the attorney said "stand your ground" would not apply - that it only comes into play in certain "clear cut" situations, such as shooting a burglar in your home etc. That would seem a sensible application of such a law.

reply to post by Violater1


Maybe I missed it, but there have been few details about Martin's condition that have been released.
Don't even know if he had any cuts or bruises on his body/face. All I (think) I know is--
the funeral director *claimed* Martin did not appear to have been in a fight (his hands didn't have cuts or anything)
he was found face down, and he got shot in the chest.. that's really all I can semi-confirm but even then not sure.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
reply to post by EvillerBob

 

Considering witnesses claim they were outside right away and were witnessing the very last seconds, I don't believe Zimmerman had time or even tried to move Martin's body.

I'm not suggesting he moved the body deliberately. I'm suggesting that Martin may still have been capable of movement for a limited time after being shot. Zimmerman would likely have been trying to get out from underneath him as well, so if Martin didn't "drop" immediately, or was trying to rise to move away, Zimmerman's struggling might have caused him to stagger away from the location.

That's why I'm asking if the body was found to be at the exact location of the shooting. You can't always assess how close or how far from the vehicle - or even what direction people were facing or heading - when the altercation occured, purely based on the location or the body

Originally posted by Violater1
No one has answered my question yet. How far away from the truck was Martin found?

I will see if I can find a link somewhere but that had a good graphic on one of the cable channels.

His body was found on a walkway behind (or in between) the homes. It was not close to the street.

Originally posted by EvillerBob
Even leaving that hurdle aside, we are left with the central position at law - Zimmerman simply needs to raise enough evidence to put self defence forward. Between his statement and the witness statement placing Martin on top, would you say that burden has been discharged?

If you are asking me personally, I would have to say I honestly do not know. From the reports I have read several witness have changed their statements, one even going so far as to say the media reported the statement falsely and is requesting through a lawyer the original interview tape (the statement attributed to the 13 year old witness).

The media spin on this one is so severe it is hard to tell what is top and what is bottom. I just hope that when a decision is made on if to prosecute or not, they will make more information available. But my fear is some are so ingrained in their opinion of what happened the decision will just cause more outrage.

OiO

Originally posted by Classified Info

Originally posted by Violater1
No one has answered my question yet. How far away from the truck was Martin found?

I will see if I can find a link somewhere but that had a good graphic on one of the cable channels.

His body was found on a walkway behind (or in between) the homes. It was not close to the street.

Yes, please provide a source for where his body was found. I'm sure there would be a blood trail, and that will end up in court as well.
Thank you.