George Zimmerman to be charged in Trayvon Martin shooting, official says

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
Exactly. And the preponderance of the evidence is not in Z's favor at this point. His word is not proof of anything.

Again stop using your personal views and use the law. Preponderance of evidence is a low threshold. His lawyer will invoke SYG, explain why and go from there. It is up to the PA to dismantle the defenses argument, with the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If she cannot explain away the defense, the case is done. She is going to have to make a circumstantial case because she was not present when the incident occurred.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
I would accept a clear photo of his injuries as proof he was injured. Because he was injured does not prove Martin was the aggressor.

and because Martin is dead it does not mean he didn't attack Zimmerman. Feel free to browse the media covering this.. They will have their own versions of the video and injuries. Absent that im not sure what you or the others consider as reliable. I mean I could guess but we have enough of that going on in this thread already.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
Yes. So that would fact would exonerate Trayvon in this circumstance.

edit on 14-4-2012 by CoherentlyConfused because: (no reason given)

I doubt it...

Originally posted by Xcathdra
If no arrest could have been made then why do an interview? Secondly the girl was known to law enforcement after 3 weeks of remaining silent and since we do not have all the info lets wait and see if she is even relevant.

Well, she was only the last person to speak to the homicide victim, just at the moment of the killing. Why indeed should the police have attempted to contact her? Why would she even be relevant. lol:

You know absolutely zero about police procedures, aside from copying and pasting text content from some manual you found.

The parents of Treyvan Martin were the ones who figured out the 16 year old was on the phone with Martin when it occurred. For some reason they never bothered to contact police, and neither did their lawyer. The family contacted the 16 year old and gave an interview to the Martins lawyer before they disclosed to the police that she was on the phone the night it occurred.

Translation: the Martins didn't trust the Sanford Police Dept. and did their own investigations. Thankfully they did, because the SPD certainly wasn't going to do any follow-up.

Since by your postulation above questioning why an interview was even necessary because there was no arrest, why would the police even be looking for solid investigative material from Trayvon's family?

And, in case you're mentally checked out on this issue, the lack of an initial arrest is a major point of scrutiny in examining the way SPD handled the killing. It is one of the reasons that federal agents are involved, doing a parallel investigation. Again, it should be noted that the lead detective wanted to arrest and charge GZ.

You are ignoring the part where Martins cell phone became evidence. There are rules in place on how evidence is handled and processed. If an officer were to go through the phone and accidentally erase something it will create a massive issue. Its easier to follow basic police procedure by bagging and tagging the evidence and allowing a lab expert analyze it. That way there will be no challenges on chain of custody or tampering with evidence.

So, its just fine and dandy for police not to follow up on leads -- like finding the last person that a murder victim spoke to on the phone -- because of chain of custody concerns? Why do you continue to post such nonsense?

I wish that a real police officer would jump in here and provide some actual information on correct procedures. Apparently, you're under the impression that you can just post any kind of tripe and act authoritative in order for your points to be accepted. No one is buying this act, for your information.

My point being is there is more going on than what you guys realize / understand. This is not a moral argument, its a legal argument and as such you guys can't interject your personal opinions while ignoring the laws in place.

As far as I can tell, the person who's most guilty of interjecting personal opinions into this discussion is you. No matter how cockamamie the excuse, if it might possibly be in GZ's favor, you're making it.

Actually no its not... It will be used at the preliminary hearing coming up and his lawyer will move for a dismissal. The issue you are raising comes at the trial portion.

Wrong again. Predictably, you contradicted yourself in trying to shoehorm your biased views into what is actually true. At the preliminary hearing, it will be determined if SYG can be part of GZ's defense. As of now, since no ruling has taken place, all that has happened is that an assertion has been made by GZ's lawyer. It has NOT been established that SYG will indeed be part of this case.

I'll also note that, as someone has already stated, prominent voices in the political and legal community have posited that GZ will NOT be entitled protection by SYG. We'll see what happens when the ruling is to be made.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
the link you posted is not sourced by abc....it is sourced by breitbart . com........why are you still lying or do you not understand what 'source' means?

Where did Breitbart get their information from? Oh thats right, ABC. Again had you read it you would see the additional links to the various ABC articles referenced.

Today, ABC has made an astounding about-face on a story related to the Trayvon Martin shooting. Less than a week after proclaiming that new video showed no signs of injury on Zimmerman the night of the shooting, ABC has now released an enhanced version of the same video. The new video clearly shows a bloody gash on the back of Zimmerman's head. Here's the lede of the story ABC published Wednesday March 28th:

Reading - its your friend and I highly encourage you to start doing that before opening your mouth.

Also you really need to stop with the personal attacks.. It accomplishes nothing and only makes you look childish.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
How do you know breitbart hasn't manipulated that photo?......there several clear shots of the back of the killers head....why does it only appear on that one shot? Ill tell you why, its a shadow cast from something above......

How do you know Zimmerman didn't act in self defense? Secondly you shouldn't lie. So how about you provide a source that addresses the gash as nothing but a shadow from something above. I look forward to you providing the source to support your "claim".

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Just because the headline on Breitbart . com say ABC in it doesn't make ABC the source, the source is still breitbart....in case you didn't know that.

Again if you spent more time reading and less time attacking me you would have seen the links in the article that takes you to ABC's website. The article is based on all of the info ABC has accumulated.

Again - please take the time to actually read the posts. Also, stop with the name calling.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Well, she was only the last person to speak to the homicide victim, just at the moment of the killing. Why indeed should the police have attempted to contact her? Why would she even be relevant. lol:

Actually she was not the last person to talk to Martin - Zimmerman was. Secondly look up the legal requirements for rules of evidence. Aside from testifying to being on the phone she cannot state as fact what occurred. Unless you can point out the laws you are using to argue she is the lynch-pin to all of this.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
You know absolutely zero about police procedures, aside from copying and pasting text content from some manual you found.

I see you guys have no issues with lying do you. Feel free to support your accusation with facts.
Again typical cant refute the facts so attack the poster crap. Its childish and serve no purpose. If you think I dont know procedure here is an idea so pay attention. How about you post / cite your info about police procedures to refute what im telling you. After all you and others apparently know everything that occurred and how investigations work.

Feel free to put your money where your mouth is.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Translation: the Martins didn't trust the Sanford Police Dept. and did their own investigations. Thankfully they did, because the SPD certainly wasn't going to do any follow-up.

Learn the law before making an accusation. If you know so much about police procedure feel free to cite post where it tells law enforcement how to process a crime scene. Tell me how evidence is processed on scene and then at the lab. Tell me whats required in between the collection and analysis. Her testimony is not relevant because it does not address what actually occurred.

I think you need to take your own advice on police procedure. Again check rules of evidence as well.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Since by your postulation above questioning why an interview was even necessary because there was no arrest, why would the police even be looking for solid investigative material from Trayvon's family?

To tie up any loose ends. Tell me where in police procedure it states law enforcement can continue an investigation when the PA is refusing to file charges? All the Martin family can provide is information basics. The issues are from contact to police showing up. The Martin parents nor his girlfriend were present.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
And, in case you're mentally checked out on this issue, the lack of an initial arrest is a major point of scrutiny in examining the way SPD handled the killing. It is one of the reasons that federal agents are involved, doing a parallel investigation. Again, it should be noted that the lead detective wanted to arrest and charge GZ.

And again you need to understand the police to not charge people. That is the PA and solely the PA.. Constantly trying to bring up the detectives actions only supports Zimmerman's side. The reason the Pa is doing their own investigation is to ensure the information is correct. It will also serve as a base line to review Sanford PDs investigation.

Anytime an investigation is questioned, whoever the second agency is assigned to do the redo starts fresh. Standard police procedure and since you know police procedure you should know that. As well as who is responsible. for filing charges.

Law Enforcement is NOT part of the judicial branch.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
So, its just fine and dandy for police not to follow up on leads -- like finding the last person that a murder victim spoke to on the phone -- because of chain of custody concerns? Why do you continue to post such nonsense?

Tell me how the police knew the night of the shooting that Martin was talking to his girlfriend. Why did it take her 3 weeks to be discovered if she has such critical information?

Originally posted by shepseskaf
I wish that a real police officer would jump in here and provide some actual information on correct procedures. Apparently, you're under the impression that you can just post any kind of tripe and act authoritative in order for your points to be accepted. No one is buying this act, for your information.

Ah yes... Cant refute the facts, attack the poster. I take notice that neither you or the other 2 amigos have posted any information to refute what Iim stating. All I see is the attacks.... Surely if you are so right and im do wrong then prove it.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
As far as I can tell, the person who's most guilty of interjecting personal opinions into this discussion is you. No matter how cockamamie the excuse, if it might possibly be in GZ's favor, you're making it.

Lol.. so pathetic.. How about you actually do some research and refute what im posting. So far all you have done is whine about info you dont like coupled with info you just dont understand. Like the detective not able to file charges or the 1 year old girl.

Again - this is based on law, not your own personal moral standards

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Wrong again. Predictably, you contradicted yourself in trying to shoehorm your biased views into what is actually true. At the preliminary hearing, it will be determined if SYG can be part of GZ's defense. As of now, since no ruling has taken place, all that has happened is that an assertion has been made by GZ's lawyer. It has NOT been established that SYG will indeed be part of this case.

If by wrong again you mean you then I agree. Even the special prosecutor says your wrong.
NPR news

CORNISH: So first of all, in the case of George Zimmerman, what sort of obstacle does the Stand Your Ground law present at this point for the prosecution?

OVALLE: Well, I think all the legal observers that are following this case expect that at some point, it could be a few months down the road, that Zimmerman's defense attorney will file a motion for immunity. What happens in Florida is that a judge will hold an evidentiary hearing. It would almost be like a mini trial where they will have to put on evidence and oftentimes a defendant will take the stand himself and the judge will decide by a looser standard than beyond a reasonable doubt, basically more likely than not, whether the defendant was acting in self-defense. So for the defense part, this is a great tool. You basically have another bite at the apple to try to prove your guy's innocence and get him off.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
I'll also note that, as someone has already stated, prominent voices in the political and legal community have posited that GZ will NOT be entitled protection by SYG. We'll see what happens when the ruling is to be made.

At some point you need to learn how government works and what each branch is responsible for. The executive branch nor the legislative branch have any authority in this incident to state the SYG law applies or does not apply. That is up to a judge and the fact its going to be used at the next preliminary supports that position.

Again, quit ignoring information that doesn't support your position. This is based on law, not what you personally think nor does it matter what a governor / legislature think. Surely you are familiar with government since you are an expert on police procedure right.

Fell free to show me where a Governor or legislature can interfere in a criminal case. Or are you just making stuff up?

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
So i guess that means you can't back up your claim of a 'gash'. So is that another lie from you or just your way of embellishing to make you case look better? Either way it is dishonest.

So I guess you are incapable of reading. What does the ABC title state? Oh look - gash.

As I stated before any info you guys get that doesn't support your view is dismissed.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Where in that picture does it document a 'gash'. So me proof he had a 'gash'....at best he has scratch....AT BEST....It looks like a shadow to me....those marks don't stay on his head consistently. But thats not the point. The point is you are calling it a 'gash'....Ive not seen any Police, Medical, or any other record that states he had a gash. The police report says 'bleeding from the back of the head'.......nothing about a gash. Guess thats just more of the fantasy evidence you have made up. Typical.

I will go ahead and add medical doctor to the growing list of what you reject because it doesn't fit your argument.

What part of police cant diagnose a medical condition are you failing to understand? Hence the reason medical was called to the scene. When Zimmerman's medical records come out and confirm the injuries what are you going to do then? Accuse the EMS crew of covering a crime up?

Since you aren't aware feel free to research medical terminology dealing with wounds.. Then come back and lecture us on medical.

I guess you are incapable of actually citing a source. The headline of the link you posted says 'ABC' the link you post goes to Breitbart . com ...... that makes Breitbart . com the source. Do you not understand that? or again you just making things up?

It doesn't matter what happens when those mystery documents come out. We are talking about what is out in the public now. What is out in public now, such as your 'gash' photo, show nothing to back up his story.....I can't wait til the EMT records come out .... thats gonna be a fun day for all Zim supporters.

And Ill be right here when those records are released. I seriously doubt you will be, because we all know he isn't going to have anything to back up those claims. It was noted yesterday there is no scarring to the back of his from the terrible 'gashes' he got that night. Remember we can see him now. If he had such terrible gashes, Id expect some scarring....in my webmd medical opinion.

Could you tell me how long 'medical' spent with Zimmerman at the scene? I know the maximum amount of time they could have spent with him based on the timeline of activities. I know that he has no bandages on his head or nose from any wounds. I know a second ambulance was cancelled, so the EMT's that worked on Trayvon, would have then had to have moved on to Zimmerman. If his injuries were so severe, I mean 'gashes' are severe are they not, wouldn't he demand medical attention at a hospital to have xrays and the whole nine yards of medical tests to make sure he was ok? Nope, he got all his 'medical attention' in the back of a police car. Ive never had 'gash' that didn't scar. I have pics to prove that scarring as well.

I don't need to lecture anyone on medical terminology. I am not the one using the word 'gash' with nothing more than 1 screen grab out of many. And you know what, even if his head was 'gashed' what does that prove? It doesn't prove he didn't start an altercation....it just proves he was probably losing the altercation he started and had to use his gun to coward out.

You can be as condescending as you want, Ive got all day. Im not the one who has been caught making things up, embellishing, and wrongly citing sources. I don't need to have a superiority complex to know what I am talking about regarding this matter. I wonder why you feel you need one? HMMMMM????

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
What is out in public now, such as your 'gash' photo, show nothing to back up his story.....I can't wait til the EMT records come out ....

IMO - those marks on his head seem awfully high - - to be from banging a head on the ground.

Just an observation.

xcathdra, is it normal to work on a gash in the back of a police car and is it normal to let a person change their clothes or was it that zimmerman just didnt get that dirty or bloody in that life threatening altercation? from your point of view do you think there are pics of his wounds along with xrays of his nose? also from your point of view do you think zim and trays clothes will be used as evidence to show possible grass stains and blood?

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
the link you posted is not sourced by abc....it is sourced by breitbart . com........why are you still lying or do you not understand what 'source' means?

Where did Breitbart get their information from? Oh thats right, ABC. Again had you read it you would see the additional links to the various ABC articles referenced.

Today, ABC has made an astounding about-face on a story related to the Trayvon Martin shooting. Less than a week after proclaiming that new video showed no signs of injury on Zimmerman the night of the shooting, ABC has now released an enhanced version of the same video. The new video clearly shows a bloody gash on the back of Zimmerman's head. Here's the lede of the story ABC published Wednesday March 28th:

Reading - its your friend and I highly encourage you to start doing that before opening your mouth.

Also you really need to stop with the personal attacks.. It accomplishes nothing and only makes you look childish.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
How do you know breitbart hasn't manipulated that photo?......there several clear shots of the back of the killers head....why does it only appear on that one shot? Ill tell you why, its a shadow cast from something above......

How do you know Zimmerman didn't act in self defense? Secondly you shouldn't lie. So how about you provide a source that addresses the gash as nothing but a shadow from something above. I look forward to you providing the source to support your "claim".

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Just because the headline on Breitbart . com say ABC in it doesn't make ABC the source, the source is still breitbart....in case you didn't know that.

Again if you spent more time reading and less time attacking me you would have seen the links in the article that takes you to ABC's website. The article is based on all of the info ABC has accumulated.

Again - please take the time to actually read the posts. Also, stop with the name calling.

I can read just fine. That is how I know you cited your source wrong. Just because Breitbart says he has information on ABC does not make ABC the source....who is reporting it? Breitbart, that makes Breitbart the source. I guess you didn't go to high school.

Well if you followed this conversation at all, you would know, ive always thought it was a shadow because it only appears in that one spot where he is standing. I don't have to cite a source for that because I said 'I will tell you why'....did you notice the word 'I' that started the sentence.....'I' am the source, that means, I believe it is a shadow....so it was sourced, by me. Ive always thought it was a shadow and Ive never claimed any expert or anyone else agreed with me. Unlike you claiming an expert said it Zimmerman yelling, that was you making things up, I stated my opinion.....big difference.

You can keep saying I can't read all you want. If it somehow makes you feel better that is ok. I can see through what you are trying to do, it only weakens your already weak argument and others are seeing it as well, its not just me.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
I don't need to have a superiority complex to know what I am talking about regarding this matter.

See this is the sad part because in fact you do not know what you are talking about. As for the rest of your rant, again, if you bothered to read you would see I answered your questions.

So is there any reason you need to continually lie by stating you read my posts in their entirety and I never answered the question.

By all means, show me what you want answered and I will direct you to the multiple posts I have already made on it. That we we can move beyond your constant attacks and off topic rants.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
What is out in public now, such as your 'gash' photo, show nothing to back up his story.....I can't wait til the EMT records come out ....

IMO - those marks on his head seem awfully high - - to be from banging a head on the ground.

Just an observation.

I can agree with that too. In the world we live in I just really believe, in my personal opinion that if any photos of his 'injuries' exisited that proved his claim in any way shape or form they would have been leaked by now. We live in an age of leak.....remember Rhianna? Her photos leaked, cuz it proved it her claim. I personally believe Zimmermans have not because it doesn't support his claim or the decision to not arrest him that night. Those pics don't look good for Zimmerman and they don't look good for the PD.....if they exist.

And before anyone in particular screams cite a source....I said it was all my opinion. Sourced by me.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
What is out in public now, such as your 'gash' photo, show nothing to back up his story.....I can't wait til the EMT records come out ....

IMO - those marks on his head seem awfully high - - to be from banging a head on the ground.

Just an observation.

Not if the person is laying on the ground near the curb where he was getting his head bashed on.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
I don't need to have a superiority complex to know what I am talking about regarding this matter.

See this is the sad part because in fact you do not know what you are talking about. As for the rest of your rant, again, if you bothered to read you would see I answered your questions.

So is there any reason you need to continually lie by stating you read my posts in their entirety and I never answered the question.

By all means, show me what you want answered and I will direct you to the multiple posts I have already made on it. That we we can move beyond your constant attacks and off topic rants.

Pointing out your inconsistencies and occasional flat out lie is not off topic, nor is it ranting.

Again stating I can't read. Is that like a little kick for you to say that? Ive read everything you wrote, thats why I know alot of it has been wrong on certain points. Im sorry if you think its ranting or off topic to point that out to you. Quit doing those things and I won't have to correct you on your mistakes.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
What is out in public now, such as your 'gash' photo, show nothing to back up his story.....I can't wait til the EMT records come out ....

IMO - those marks on his head seem awfully high - - to be from banging a head on the ground.

Just an observation.

Not if the person is laying on the ground near the curb where he was getting his head bashed on.

What curb?

Wasn't there just a pedestrian walk path?

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
xcathdra, is it normal to work on a gash in the back of a police car

Uhm.. ok I dont even know how to address that comment since its been noted and explained time after time.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
and is it normal to let a person change their clothes or was it that zimmerman just didnt get that dirty or bloody in that life threatening altercation?

From all I have read the clothes Zimmerman had on at the time of the incident were the same ones he had on when he arrived at the police station. The police report noted the condition of Zimmerman's appearance did it not? Including clothing>?

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
from your point of view do you think there are pics of his wounds along with xrays of his nose? also from your point of view do you think zim and trays clothes will be used as evidence to show possible grass stains and blood?

From what I have seen and to support his position he will need to show medical records documenting the claimed injuries. Medical records are not subject to sunshine laws and are governed by a mix of state and federal laws (criminal and civil - Federal Law - HIPPA)

The one issue that can affect all of this is how far the police got in their investigation when it was learned the Pa would not file charges. Since a person is no longer a "suspect" items can't just be seized and trying to apply for a warrant will not work since there is no crime to investigate. If that occurs both sides will make an attempt to get video admitted in and will go down the road of the ABC article with enhancement and what not.

The prosecutors case is based on circumstantial evidence that can be interpreted in different ways. Thats why I was surprised the judge allowed the 2nd murder charge to fly since to date, I dont see anything that justifies the charge (evidence standpoint).

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
I can agree with that too. In the world we live in I just really believe, in my personal opinion that if any photos of his 'injuries' exisited that proved his claim in any way shape or form they would have been leaked by now.

Your comment right above here is exactly why we have people, including yourself, who are so confused and lost about the law and how it works that its not even funny. I dont understand how you would accept leaked photos yet reject an enhanced video. We know where the video came from - we wont know where the pictures came from.

Why the double standard? Is it your position to ignore any and all information that even remotely supports Zimmerman's side? If medical files are released and it supports Zimmerman's story, then what? What excuse will you use then to dismiss the results?

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
What is out in public now, such as your 'gash' photo, show nothing to back up his story.....I can't wait til the EMT records come out ....

IMO - those marks on his head seem awfully high - - to be from banging a head on the ground.

Just an observation.

Not if the person is laying on the ground near the curb where he was getting his head bashed on.

What curb?

Wasn't there just a pedestrian walk path?

Yes, and not to mention that Trayvons body was entirely in grass and his head was facing toward the building with his feet pointing toward the sidewalk. Thats another reason Zimmermans account of having his head bashed in doesn't make sense, because the sidewalk was at their feet. Thats why I believe he made that part up. None of the witnesses saw him getting his head beat in....they all saw 'scuffling or wrestling'.....'john' says wrestling on his 911 call...and changed it in his doorway interview to 'beating'....but never said he saw anyone's head being 'beat' into a sidewalk.........

So i could see where Zimmerman may got a scratch or two on his head in a 'scuffle'.....but thats about it.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Pointing out your inconsistencies and occasional flat out lie is not off topic, nor is it ranting.

Actually is trolling because the issue was already dealt with. for some reason you cant seem to get over it. You are making accusations at me yet you cant support them.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Again stating I can't read. Is that like a little kick for you to say that? Ive read everything you wrote, thats why I know alot of it has been wrong on certain points. Im sorry if you think its ranting or off topic to point that out to you. Quit doing those things and I won't have to correct you on your mistakes.

Its the only conclusion I can arrive at because you keep asking the same crap over and over when its already been answered. You failed to read cite sources in their entirety before coming back in here and making more accusations at me.

Secondly I have called you out in a few posts asking you to cite your sources to support your claims.. Yet here we are, and you have provided nothing except a post that states "in your opinion". Were the other posts your opinion as well? Since you passed them off as facts please cite the sources.

Please - grow up act your age and engage in the topic...


If the medical files are released and supports Zimmerman's position, will you accept that?
If the witnesses who saw what occurred testify and it supports Zimmerman will you accept that?
If Zimmerman's lawyer successfully argues SYG at the preliminary and the charge is dismissed will you accept that?

Or will you discount it as a cover up?

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Yes, and not to mention that Trayvons body was entirely in grass and his head was facing toward the building with his feet pointing toward the sidewalk. Thats another reason Zimmermans account of having his head bashed in doesn't make sense, because the sidewalk was at their feet.

Zimmerman got beat up shortly after moving to Florida. Not much has been said about that.

Could these be scars from a previous injury? Perhaps from when he got beat up.

Could that beating have resulted in some brain damage?

Something is missing in all this.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Please - grow up act your age and engage in the topic...

Grow up?

Why don't you just post your opinion - - - and let everything else go.

How grown up is it - - - that you have to argue you are right?

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
I can agree with that too. In the world we live in I just really believe, in my personal opinion that if any photos of his 'injuries' exisited that proved his claim in any way shape or form they would have been leaked by now.

Your comment right above here is exactly why we have people, including yourself, who are so confused and lost about the law and how it works that its not even funny. I dont understand how you would accept leaked photos yet reject an enhanced video. We know where the video came from - we wont know where the pictures came from.

Why the double standard? Is it your position to ignore any and all information that even remotely supports Zimmerman's side? If medical files are released and it supports Zimmerman's story, then what? What excuse will you use then to dismiss the results?

Ok, you're not a police officer. Leaks happen on both sides. Just because something gets leaked does not mean we don't know its authentic. Police leak things to crime reporters all the time, prosecutors leak things to media all the time, defense attorney's leak things to the public all the time. There are some things that these people want out before trials for whatever reason. Saying that becuase something is leak makes is unreliable is just nonsense. Are you saying that all information that is leaked is unreliable?

If and when medical files are released that support Zimmerman than bring it on. I haven't seen those records yet so I can't comment on them, and you can't either.