Skip to comments.Today's Buzz: Are Zimmerman's injuries a game changer?
Posted on 05/17/2012 12:59:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
ABC-TV news reported this week that George Zimmerman had a broken nose, two black eyes and lacerations on the back of his head the day after his fatal confrontation with 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. ABC said it had obtained a medical report that documents Zimmerman's injuries. The injuries could back up Zimmerman's claim that he was defending himself from an attack by Trayvon when he pulled the trigger. Florida's stand your ground law allows people who feel threatened by death or serious injury to respond with deadly force....
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.orlandosentinel.com ...
Zimmerman should get a full ride scholarship to Duke University.
It isn't "stand your ground" when a thug is bashing your head into the ground; it is ordinary self-defense.
However, it is a hate crime to defend yourself against an attack by one of Eric Holder's people.
If I was Zimmerman’s attorney, I’d make bloody sure that I delayed this case as long as I can in hopes that it’s prolonged until January 20, 2013. Even a “NOT GUILTY” by his jurors results in more charges by the most vile, disgusting filth in the Obama administration (I’d go as far as to say worse than Obama himself), Eric Holder.
Shame on the prosecutors. They knew about ALL this evidence BEFORE.
The headline is a duhh
AND OBAMA WILL TELL EVERYONE TO SHUT UP....JUST LIKE HE TOLD Reverend Wright. Probably cost Obama a few bucks (out of his campaign funds) ....but what's new.
“Florida’s stand your ground law allows people who feel threatened by death or serious injury to respond with deadly force...”
Stand Your Ground, obviously, and is part of this story because people want to kill it. But as I’ve said before, Simmerman wouldn’t need to assert it. If Martin was on top of him as he’s said, a witness appears to corroborate, and the medical report apparently backs up, regular-old self-defense applies. You can’t very well retreat if someone’s pinning you down.
“The headline is a duhh”
I don’t know. It’s not like there was any evidence of 2nd degree murder before, and there was made public evidence of his injuries in the form a picture of the back of his head. This being a “game changer” in the courtroom in your head is a “duh.” But whether it will be for practical purposes, the DA, the MSM, the rabble-rousers, and the general political climate being what it is is up in the air.
I’d tend to think it’d change momentum and put Zimmerman’s would-be lynchers on the defensive. Then again, I’d tend to believe the evidence and lackthereof beforehand would’ve put them on the defensive, too. So what do I know?
It would be interesting to know whether the Florida Governor could issue Z a pardon at some point...Holder wouold take it in the shorts!
I PRAY Zimmerman sues each and every person who incited violence, racism or riots against him!!!
This is about stirring things up to gain votes. What actually happened has never made any difference to those doing the stirring.
In fact, if they can stir up more controversy with an acquittal, I am certain that is what zero and his brainless friends want to happen.
The chicken crap Florida governor is the one who appointed the special prosecutor.
This was not run by a Grand Jury in the first place because they were afraid they would get a no bill.
I think they were angling on railroading him into a plea. You can see the drill, 10 prosecutors, all on state pay verses a relatively poor defendant with either a court appointed attorney or the public defender. It would be like the lions verses the christians and the lions were undefeated. But alas, an attorney stepped forward and the steam engine of injustice is now on the siding.
The state’s attorney has too much invested here to now drop the case so I guess we move on to the prelim and hopefully the judge does his job and dismisses the charges with prejudice. When that day approaches, go to personal DEFCON 2 because the junior citizens will be whipped up into a frenzy and all hell might break loose.
I hope this does not go to a jury, the trial will be a circus and no way the jurors need that kind of personal grief for doing the right thing: a not guilty verdict.
Governors can’t pardon federal charges.
Gio Benitez @GioBenitez @mattgutmanABC reports Trayvon's autopsy shows he was 5'11, 160 lbs, and had THC in system (he had been suspended for pot a few days before)
Gio Benitez @GioBenitez BREAKING: Discovery Files in the State's case against George Zimmerman to be released today after 5 p.m.
Sometimes the facts can get in the way of the truth.....
The same chicken crap governor? The one who boldly rebuffed the Tampa mayor who wanted to ban guns downtown during the RNC? The one who pushed for welfare and state worker drug tests (activist judges shot it down, but he tried). The one who rebuffed the waste of money high speed rail from Tampa to Orlando? I’d say he’s taken many politically unpopular, but conservative, opinions. He’s not perfect; no one is.
Politically, he had to appoint a special prosecutor. Frankly, I’m glad he did - evidence is coming out that may not have had the charges been dropped. I want a RESOUNDING Zimmerman acquittal (or the charges dropped). Notice how the media has gone cold on this story now that their storyline isn’t playing out?
Most interesting to me is the lack of injury to Zimmerman’s knuckles.
Indicates he never landed a blow.
(The black, in contast, had injuries to his knuckles, indicating he was the attacker.)
Fascinating. I’ll be watching. Thanks.
The only game change is the constant race baiting by a dying press looking for any advantage to incite violence by constantly planting seeds which will bear your vaunted and sought after fruits this summer....October at the latest.
The parents made some big bucks and are happy and Zimmerman and family will be forever scarred by the dumb little skittle dealing punk.
You better believe that’s what’ll happen.
Barrytard will go TV and give a speech about race and slant it so it benefits the rioters who will only need a minor Que the burn, slash and shoot anyone they get to.
Reginald Dennis will be nothing compared to what they will do this time and they have sitting around watching how much of a pass OWS has been getting and they have come to the conclusion they will get a pretty good pass as well.
Facts are irrelevant. This is purely a political case.
If Zimmerman's name had been Jorge Zapata or some other Hispanic sounding name he never would have been selected as the poster boy for evil white racism.
I think Trayvon’s injuries are the game changer, the beat up knuckles from beating on someone
Hmmm... So the kid was a pothead. seems like he could have an adverse reaction to it that made everyone spooky to him.
Same as well musing with someone when yer drunk. Yuice Got Tuh Takez yer lumps.
I always suspected that this was why the autopsy had been kept under wraps so long. Martin went for a Skittles run because he was stoned and had the munchies.
I know but what if Z is pardoned prior to Holder bringing the Fed charges...shoots Holder’s agenda full of holes.
He’d go with the charges anyway.
It would be a good test of 10th Amendment.
I’d sort of like the trial to [proceed, althouth preferably after the November elections, just to clear the air as to just what that fresh-faced, smiling 14-yr. old Trayvon was doing prior to his assaulting Zimmerman, plus the fact that the 911 operator/dispatcher did not order or demand that Zimmerman cease surveillance of the person of interest. In response to Zimmerman’s question, he was told, “No, we don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman, as I interpreted what then occurred, did cease said surveillance, turned and headed back to his auto.
That isn't self defense.
The injuries George and Treyvon received are consistent with George being fearful for his life if the fight continued - but they do not determine who initiated the confrontation.
All posters saying this proves that Treyvon started the fight.... how?
If the case continues it will be based upon who started the fight to establish self defense - not who was losing the fight.
It’s obvious that Mr Zimmerman tried to beat the poor candy carrying child to death with his face.
How very clever of him.
>>Id sort of like the trial to [proceed<<
Unfortunately, if the case goes to trial, and Zimmerman is found not guilty, Trayvon’s family can still hit him, the condo association, etc. etc. with a suit for civil damages.
If the case gets thrown out by the judge, FL’s self-defense law (AKA the Stand Your Ground statute) makes Zimmerman immune from civil suits.
That isn't self defense.
Can you cite statutes or rulings in support of this claim? (I'll stipulate that who started the fight is relevant to whether one believed one's life was in danger.)
That isn't self defense.
That is true. However, it is not up to Zimmerman to prove that he didn't start the fight - it is up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman started the fight in order to negate any self-defense claim by Zimmerman. So far, the evidence appears to point toward Martin being the aggressor, but the state probably cannot prove who started the fight one way or another. In this case, that favors Zimmerman, because legally, he doesn't have to prove anything.
One(1) graze on one(1) knuckle of one (1) hand. You really think that can be played into a savage attack?
The State has one heck of a case in front of them and a high hurdle of evidence to clear - because so far there have been no reports of any witnesses to who initiated the fight. We have the interview of George after the fact - and Treyvon - the only other witness - is dead.
I am sure much hay will be made of - and straw attempted to be spun into gold with - the ‘not getting away again’ quote from George - and the ‘you don't need to do that (follow him)’ from the dispatcher.
What evidence points towards Martin being the aggressor?
Apparently nothing in the “Stand your Ground” law actually spells this out - and one CAN start a fight - determine you are losing the fight - and then kill the person you started the fight with. I was wrong with how the law was written - but the intent - according to it's authors - was that such a defense was predicated upon being the victim of an aggressive attack - not the initiator of it.
The problem is that nothing in Peadon and Baxleys law says this. It provides that any person may use deadly force when he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another. So long as someone reasonably thinks he or someone else is in danger, he can shoot to kill, regardless of whether the shooter is the one who initiated the hostile confrontation.
That pig in the second picture needs to eat less and move more. He’s in absolutely no shape to be carrying out his militia duties.
I do, however, commend him for trying.
The young lady in the first picture could be my daughter (but she’s not).
“What evidence points towards Martin being the aggressor?”
The question is, “what evidence points toward Zimmerman being the aggressor?” State has to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.
So far there seems zero evidence of who - once they met up - started the violence.
And it may be a moot point - apparently if the law is interpreted as written - a person can start a fight, determine that their life is in danger if the fight continues, and then draw a gun and use deadly force to stop the fight.
Well, how about the fact that Zimmerman had the injuries to his face, head and back, while Martin's only injuries were to his hands (indicating he was the one doing the hitting) and the gunshot wound...
There is also the small fact that Zimmerman had lost sight of Martin a full 2-3 minutes before the final confrontation, and Martin was only about a football field away from where he was staying when Zimmerman lost sight of him. It would have taken Martin less than 30 seconds walking at a fast pace (not even running) to cover that distance. So how is it that the confrontation occurred less than 40 yards from Zimmerman's vehicle? Isn't it likely that, rather than go home, Martin circled around and confronted Zimmerman?
I believe it's one of those cases where you have two equally viable defenses. Self-defense is more powerful because it's a common law defense and not dependent on the Florida legislature or on a court's interpretation of an issue of first impression under the statute.
The common law is well-established and draws on nationally accepted legal standards to fill in the blanks in Florida law.
That’s just the statutory law, too, 2ndDivisionVet. Hidden among the dusty tomes of the Southeastern Reporter (and S.E.2d, S.E.3rd, etc.) and the individual Florida variants, you’ll find common law rights of self defense that are independent of those statutes.
Self defense predates Noah, much less the Magna Carta.
well maybe not, I think I would like to know all the facts all at once
The injuries were consistent with Zimmerman losing the fight - but can bear no light on who started the confrontation.
So circumstantial evidence that Martin might have been following Zimmerman is evidence that Martin started the fight - but direct evidence of Zimmerman following Martin is not evidence that Zimmerman started the fight.
Isn’t that a double standard?
So far there is zero evidence of who started the fight - and the “who was following who” question hardly settles it.
And apparently according to the “stand your ground” law as written - one CAN start a fight, determine that they are losing said fight, and then use deadly force to stop the fight.
I don’t think that SHOULD be the law - but apparently it is (for now) in Florida.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.