Skip to comments.Funeral director on Trayvon Martin's lack of injuries (Video)
Posted on 04/02/2012 7:00:20 AM PDT by Cubs FanEdited on 04/02/2012 8:00:02 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The Florida funeral director who handled the burial of Trayvon Martin says there were no signs of a scuffle on the dead teen, contradicting...
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
But if this is so, then it is strong evidence that Trayvon Martin started the physical confrontation and that zimmerman, being bruised and nattered, fired in self defense.
Doesn’t bruising require a beating heart and takes minutes to form? No apparent bruising would be expected for Martin.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
Ok, I can’t find the link on Drudge.
And your headline is not what is at CBS.
So what story are you referring to, that no evidence of a fight supports Zimmerman?
The story contradicts Zimmerman. Obvious Troll is obvious.
Funeral director in black community backs the party line that TM didn’t start fight - no bruising on hands.
1. Medical explanation posted above.
2. What else would he say?
One news story outed the 14 year old witness and now the Mom is trying to change her son’s story.
Death threats. Bounties. President convicting Zimmerman.
The “high tech lynching” is all but complete.
Apparently bruising actually starts immediately, and even after death there is discoloration of the skin which remains as there is no blood flow.
I was in a car accident once and at emergency the doc shined a light on my skin to look for bruising, it was weird because my skin changed color under the light in a few places, then a few days there were big B/B marks.
Who knows maybe the funeral director had “the light”.
You’re totally illogical.
Zimmerman said Martin punched him, jumped him, pummeled him and beat his head on the concrete pavement.
That’s IMPOSSIBLE if there were no marks on Martin’s body.
Its really kind of incredible that an otherwise intelligent person with a predetermined opinion can look at a set of facts that proove him TOTALLY WRONG and reach the OPPOSITE conclusion.
If you were alive in 1492, you would say that Columbus was wrong and the world was really flat because he didn’t reach Asia by sailing west.
Correct. In fact bruised can take days to develop fully. If there were no tears in the skin he would look unharmed.
Sure miss an edit function. Should have been “bruises”.
Wrong. Bruises take minutes to a day to form.
Zimmerman was bruised the next day but not at police station.
Dead people don’t bruise.
So the story is bs and the funeral director is ignorant.
Confidentiality? Funderal Code of Ethics?
Family had to allow him to speak. Right?
Hmmm. Its up there now, takes you right to the CBS story.
I don’t know what’s said on the video because I’m deaf.
I gotta go look on drudge....
You need to realize this is being used to contradict Zimmerman, not support him.
The funeral director has no right to be spouting like this, it’s against his profession to do such a thing, but be that as it may...
The anti Zimmerman side is saying that Trayvon would’ve shown bruising on himself if he had repeatedly hit Zimmerman, and that no such injuries showed on his corpse.
Therefore they are saying Zimmerman (and the eyewitness) are lying about Trayvon physically attacking him.
On another thread FReepers are pointing out that dead people don’t form bruises. And Trayvon was shot and killed at about the same time he was slamming on Zimmerman.
Where did CBS dig this guy up?
Well, yes and no. There were no obvious signs of bruising that would have occurred if Zimmerman was beating Martin up. But I think what the funeral director was trying to say, to support Martin’s family, is that Martin’s hands were showing no signs that he was beating up Zimmerman.
I can’t say what hands and knuckles will show or will not show after giving a beating to someone. I think they could show scrapes and bruises, but will they ALWAYS?
CBS Link to story:
TO your point, boxers wear gloves to protect their hands.
grabbing a victim’s head will not make marks on your hands.
Also, it takes a hard punch on human tissue to break the skin on the knuckles. Even abrasions take a hard punch or numerous punches. Punches could have been deflected.
to wit, as an angry teen, I punched thru a (drywall) wall, both sides, in one punch, and did not break the skin on my knuckles.
IMPOSSIBLE (your word) is not necessarily a valid conclusion. Just sayin’
Dang it. Now everybody knows.
if zimmerman was on the receiving end of the beating then you woud not expect martin to exhibit any marks on his own body......but zimmerman would exhibit the marks..... your analysis is exactly backwards.
I know as a young man I absolutely had a fight in which I punched the other guy numerous times in the head. Never even a thought of hand bruises.
Next, it does not bruise you to lay hands on another and slam their head against the pavement.
It does not bruise one to sit on another while doing this.
Zimmerman apparently had the injuries of being punched in the nose, probably one good initial knockdown.
Subsequent punches probably were deflected, fended off, hence next move of slamming Z’s head back against the pavement.
Grabbing or threatening to grab Z’s gun does not cause bruising.
No one said this was a 20 minute steel cage match.
You punch a guy he falls, you jump on him and scuffle. You bang his head on the pavement. He shifts his body to the grass, pulls his gun and fires.
All this certain discussion of what happened is stupid and ill informed but the funeral director’s comments are not dispositive.
No .. and it's easy to prove to yourself.
Take a bath towel, fold it up a little, hold it against a wall, pretend it just insulted your wife, and give it a good hard punch.
Point being, if M gave Z one hard squared up punch that decked him, then climbed on and started dribbling Z's head off the ground,
chances are prolly better than average that there'd be no bruising on M.
I box, and I can assure you that hitting someone on the soft tissue between the cheekbone and the jawbone would likely leave not bruises, or abrasions.
The funeral director’s business likely comes from the black community. He is therefore playing to the gallery.
If the aggressor in a fight throws a first punch that is a sucker punch that puts someone down on the ground, the agressor is not going to be injured.
If the next action of the aggressor is to take hold of the person’s head and bang it on the pavement, the aggressor is also not going to show any signs of injury.
Somebody tell me what I am missing, how the funeral director’s statement is in any way relevant.
Boxers wear gloves not to protect their hands but to padd the blow to the others head.......
Regardless to the fact that a dead body does not bruise, It would be logical that Mr. Martin was not being punched.
Zimmerman was heading back to his van. Martin had eluded Zimmerman and reappeared behind Zimmerman, asking him WHY he was following him. Zimmerman said he looked suspicious. Martin started to respond, then mid-sentence sucker punch Zimmerman, knocking him to the ground.
Then he jumped on top of Zimmerman, continuing to beat him. Then he noticed Zimmerman's gun and grabbed for it. Zimmerman struggled with Martin over the gun.
So... what hand did Zimmerman use to punch Martin (who was on top of him) while one hand or both tried to get the gun back, and one hand tried to shield the blows of Martin?
I still believe, that in the struggle, it wasn't Zimmerman's finger that pulled the trigger. If it was, then it is more likely that Trayvon was 'pulling' on the pistol, which unfortunately was pointed right at his chest.
These are the kind of mistakes that wannabe ganstas make from watching too many movies.
What does this do their story that Martin was the one being beaten by Zimmerman?
What does this do their story that Martin was the one being beaten by Zimmerman?
Please, someone from the MSM interview me about the facts of this case. Because my word is about as reliable as everyone elses the media is digging up.
Next up, the fishstore owner who knew Zimmerman when he was 7.
“Zimmerman said Martin punched him, jumped him, pummeled him and beat his head on the concrete pavement.
Thats IMPOSSIBLE if there were no marks on Martins body.”
Not at all. Zimmerman’s story is that Martin punched him in the nose, breaking it and knocking him to the ground. That’s soft tissue, and such a punch might very well not bruise at all.
Then, Martin straddled Zimmerman and began bashing his head against the ground. This is usually accomplished by grabbing the head, hair or ears, and pulling and pushing. No bruising involved.
I find it very possible that Martin would have suffered no or minimal bruising.
Once again, at an age a few years older than Martin I absolutely delivered numerous direct punched to the head, bruises to the hand were not an issue in fact it’s a silly premise in a quick fight.
I’m no fighter but as a kid I also was lucky enough to get the local bully on the ground and bang his head on the pavement a few times. I certainly suffered no bruising in performing a takedown very similar to M’s.
And btw, although I forced the local bully to say “uncle” he did not have any visible marks on him, either. To open a guy’s head on the pavement you have to slam it with considerrpable force and intent.
Imagine what they would say if Martin DID have any bruises. This no knuckle bruise stuff is as silly as the old joke “ He assaulted me by repeatedly slamming into my fist with his face”.
Why would Martin get have bruises or other injuries from beating Zimmerman?
By your logic, the fact that Zimmerman had no gun shot wounds proves he didn’t shoot Martin.
“The funeral directors business likely comes from the black community.”
That really is a rather profound statement actually.
I disagree. I could sucker punch you, jump on top of you, beat you to a pulp, and not have a scratch or bruise.
One thing for sure: there was a fight
verious 911 call state fight was going on and someone was screaming for help.
1 man was on top of anouther beating him up.
This will favor Zimmerman’s claim if police have photo’s of him being beating up.
Are you sure you don't have a typo in that. If Martin punched Zimmerman, jumped him, pummeled him, beat his head on the concrete pavement, it would be Zimmerman who has the marks on him, not Martin.
Please explain your reasoning if you think Martin should have had marks on him.
It sounds like a pretty neat arrangement if those who threw all the punches were the ones that got hurt. There sure would be a lot less fights in the world.
His opinion is about on the same level as one from the local HS janitor would be.
Ok, so if I get in another car accident, I’ll tell the doctor that there is no need to look for skin discoloration with that weird light, because a guy on FR said it can’t happen.
You are one lucky person.
Gloves protect your hands fuh-real.
the OZ. of the gloves protect the ‘target’ ;-)
Specifically, his hands.
I used to repeatedly punch concrete blocks, and never had a bruise. Why would Trayvon have bruises on his?
I see your logic, but that’s not the way the news media is using this know-nothing’s comments. They’re using it to say the Martin never attacked Zimmerman, much the way they use that police video to say that Zimmerman was not injured at all.
I am more interested in autopsy results. How far away was the gun? Shouldn’t that be easy to determine based on powder burns? If the shot happened with Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, I would guess the gun was against Trayvon or really close.
Oh, listen. It’s taken them 4-5 days to get to this guy. He was on Nancy disGrace last week, and his comments were off-the-cuff. He rambled and opined and sounded like an idiot.
In this interview, he’s been practicing his remarks and he’s dressed to the nines.
This is utter BS— just like the way they’re using the police video to say Z. was not injured.
Exactly. And if not trained in ‘throwing a punch’ the impacts might not be all that hard or square.
Not only that, but a really big and violent riot might be good for his business.
In related news, the funeral director has announced that Trayvon will be buried in the Democratic Voters Section.(/s)
My son went hunting a while back. Much to my chagrin, he took a shot, but wasn’t holding the rifle correctly. The scope “dotted his eye”— gave him a deep, long cut on his forehead. It wasn’t until 2 days later that he had a black eye on that side of his head.
That’s just FYI for anybody about the behavior of bruises.
In related news, Trayvons’s death will not dampen his enthusiasm to re-elect Barack Obama and he will be participating in early voting.
You don’t get busted knuckles when you’re holding a head with your palms as you’re knocking the head into the ground.