The Zimmerman Trial

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie
ME said he didn't die instanly, was in pain.

so it is entirely possible that TM did speak and did move, just like GZ said.

Agreed!

I thought the same thing as soon as he said it.

A relative of mine and I debated this yesterday and now there is medical evidence proving that he could have done this!

Originally posted by MrWendal
How can you even say she is being bias on this issue?

I'm saying she's been biased all through the process. Her voice and body language
has been rather telling. that's my opinion.

The medical examiner is REPEATEDLY saying that other than the gun-shot wound, there are NO WOUNDS< NO INJURIES.

This is vitally important.

Who was being attacked, and who was the attacker has now been established.

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie
ME said he didn't die instanly, was in pain.

That was huge. THat's a giant hole that the defense can drive a truck through.
Still alive ... could have said 'i've been hit, oww oww' and could have pulled his
hands under his body.

Important testimony.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by MrWendal
How can you even say she is being bias on this issue?

I'm saying she's been biased all through the process. Her voice and body language
has been rather telling. that's my opinion.

I agree.

Especially how she allowed the ME to 'speculate' and describe "pain" and "suffering". These are factors that one can speculate anyway since he was shot. He was allowed to state this to appeal to emotion.

The judge allowed it.

reply to post by FlyersFan


my thought exactly.

just one more piece of testimony that backs up GZ statements.

lets just see if the defense, will use this in cross. and ask if he could have spoke or move.

ME testifies ... ALIVE ONE TO TEN MINUTES AFTER BEING SHOT!
That's a very far cry from what the prosecution has been saying.
More than enough time for Martin to say what Zimmerman claimed ...
More than enough time for Martin to pull his arms in under his body toward the pain.

That's big.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
ME testifies ... ALIVE ONE TO TEN MINUTES AFTER BEING SHOT!
That's a very far cry from what the prosecution has been saying.
More than enough time for Martin to say what Zimmerman claimed ...
More than enough time for Martin to pull his arms in under his body toward the pain.

That's big.

edit on 7/5/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)

YES!!

That, and the repeated statements by the ME that other than the gunshot wound, there were NO WOUNDS< NO INJURIES.

Zimmerman did NOT attack Trayvon.

Ok. The ME is saying that the KNUCKLES show abrasion.

Consistent with Trayvon throwing punches.

Prosecution witness testifies to prosecution question ....

This ME says 'intermediate range' of shooting.

ME says his OPINION is different from FACT. Objections .... objections ...
THE ME keeps talking without being asked questions. Gets ahead of what he practiced I guess ...

Intermediate range he said .. .4 inches up to 4 feet away.

This is the direct opposite of what the other ME prosecution witness said about it being point blank.

The State put on two ME's ... and they say differently about how far the gun shot was from Martin.

I wonder what tune you'd all be singing, if your CHILD was MURDERED. Oh, that's right, Trayvon wasn't murdered. It was "self-defense". Innocent George was "standing his ground".

this ME just blew awy all other testimony about how close the gun was.

he said loose contact, not hard contact.

Now this ME says that when the gun went off it was in contact with loose clothing.
So now he's cut his 4 inches to 4 feet testimony down to pretty much point blank.
(Doesn't the fact that the gun went off touching Martins clothing mean that this
witness just impeached his previous statement about it being 'intermediate ..
4 inches to 4 feet away??)

This 'touching clothing' now matches what the other ME said and matches what Zimmerman said
about Martin being on top and the clothing would probably have hung down from Martins body

Originally posted by WonderBoi
I wonder what tune you'd all be singing, if your CHILD was MURDERED. Oh, that's right, Trayvon wasn't murdered. It was "self-defense".

Innocent George was "standing his ground".

I have 3 children, 2 of them boys. One is a teenager, like Trayvon.

I would be DEVASTATED and CRAZY if something like this happened to any one of them.

But if I knew that my child caused their own death by assaulting another person, YES I would say that they did it out of self-defense.

I would ABSOLUTELY be devastated and in pain for the rest of my life, but I couldn't be in denial of the facts.

reply to post by ButterCookie

If my child was murdered I'd be upset and I'd probably fall apart. If my child died due to negligence I'd be upset and I'd probably fall apart. However, I'd want to know the truth and not just put someone in jail if they were not guilty of murder. I would hope that I would not want to ruin someone else's life, if they weren't guilty, simply because I was in pain.

The ME claimed that, although Martin was alive for up to 10 minutes, he wouldn't have been able to move. That Martin wouldn't have been able to pull his arms under him. The defense will have to try to discredit that testimony. The defense isn't having as good a day today as others .... so we'll see ...

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by WonderBoi
I wonder what tune you'd all be singing, if your CHILD was MURDERED. Oh, that's right, Trayvon wasn't murdered. It was "self-defense".

Innocent George was "standing his ground".

I have 3 children, 2 of them boys. One is a teenager, like Trayvon.

I would be DEVASTATED and CRAZY if something like this happened to any one of them.

But if I knew that my child caused their own death by assaulting another person, YES I would say that they did it out of self-defense.

I would ABSOLUTELY be devastated and in pain for the rest of my life, but I couldn't be in denial of the facts.

Easier said than done. I'm sure you wouldn't be so cool about it, like you type.

You can't say it was "self-defense" because that statement is coming from the only person that's still alive. You say it was "self defense" because Georgie said, it was self defense. Unfortunately, he has been known to have a violent past.

Georgie wouldn't have been "attacked" if he weren't following Trayvon. (Yeah, i keep bringing that FACT up) Cause and effect! Every action has a reaction. George was acting like a predator, not like a neighborhood WATCH leader. He took matters into his own hands, while playing: Judge, Jury, and Executioner.

Why is THIS case such a big deal? Thousands of Americans die from gun related violence a year.
Whats so special this?

reply to post by FlyersFan


If my kid was killed the way it happened in this case, i might not be very objective because i would know that my child would still be alive if GZ had not followed him with a loaded gun.
I would also know its wasnt the legal right way, but i would seek revenge for sure.
GZ had no buisness to start a sitution the ended i the death of my child - i would make him pay.

Thank god thats not the situation so i can stay objective and see it actually could be selfdefence - wonder how TMs parents view is....

Very interesting to see this ME

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The ME claimed that, although Martin was alive for up to 10 minutes, he wouldn't have been able to move. That Martin wouldn't have been able to pull his arms under him. The defense will have to try to discredit that testimony. The defense isn't having as good a day today as others .... so we'll see ...

I disagree.

Ample opportunity to discuss Trayvon's height and weight, knuckle abrasions to show punching, no other injuries or wounds to his body (was not being attacked), and the closeness of the shot.