Powered by TypePad

« The Trayvon Martin Shooting - Powder-Puff Coverage From The Times | Main | Drunk And Stupid Is No Way To Go Through Regional Summits »

April 16, 2012

Comments

Danube of Thought

"So there's a pretty big disparity between what Zimmerman claimed happened and what the evidence from the scene,including a report from medical proffessionals indicates happened."

Tell us exactly what you contend it is that Zimmerman said, and cite us to the evidence that he said it.

Failure to comply will confirm that you are a vacuous blowhard.

Some guy

Why are people wasting time trying to engage Dumbassdave in conversation?

'cause I wonder if knows the definition of 'credulity'?

'cause there is a barrel, some fish, and a...

...wait is this a trick question?

BlahBlahBlah

The nitpicking Dave is doing is iteresting. It reminds me so much of daily life.

Boy throws piece of popcorn.
Girl hit by said popcorn.
Girl screams "he poked out my eye"

...according to Dave, Girl is a liar

Man passes basketball to buddy
Buddy misses ball, is hit in face
Buddy screams "man, it broke my nose"

...according to Dave, Buddy is a liar

and on and on and on...

Now, I am not sure if Zimmerman said "he broke my nose" or not - but I do know that is probably what I would have said even if my nose wasn't broken.

Why? Because that is how people talk.

And even if Dave wants to micro-analyze everything Zimmerman said till he feels he is right, we would still only get to: 1) He was injured by Martin 2) He may have possibly relayed said injury like 90% of the population probably would (which doesn't make him a "liar", it makes him "normal")

Peter

Hope GZ gets the boot in the face.

dublindave

Hey,whats up no limit nigga.

Look,Zimmerman stated through his surragotes that his nose had been broken and he had received serious head trauma.The EMT states otherwise.Zimmerman is going to have to explain to a jury why he lied about the seriousness of his injuries.

Here's hoping a Jury buys that injuries deemed not serious warranted the use of a loaded gun to slay an unarmed child.A child who Zimmerman decided to follow despite what the police told him.A child whom he confronted in the dark,a child who was already terrified because a weird man with a loaded gun was following him.While their mulling it over they'll also be thinking of his now famous line to the dispatcher,"THEY ALWAYS GET AWAY WITH IT!".

Danube of Thought

These two dopes are just plain inadequate. I am glad to have played a part in showing them to be uninformed and slow-witted fools, but I think that task has by now been concluded rather spectacularly.

Nytol.

xyz

Can someone post a link to the EMS reports so I can read them over.

windansea

These two dopes are just plain inadequate.

They appear to think they are accomplishing something by repeatedly getting owned in a public forum

It is beyond pathetic

Sara

Won't you feel stupid if the defense presents an xray or a CAT scan showing head and face trauma.

And the only child at the scene was the dog walker. No one in their right mind is going to call a 6'2" tatted up guy a child.

dublindave

"So there's a pretty big disparity between what Zimmerman claimed happened and what the evidence from the scene,including a report from medical proffessionals indicates happened."

"Tell us exactly what you contend it is that Zimmerman said, and cite us to the evidence that he said it.Failure to comply will confirm that you are a vacuous blowhard."

Up untill his defence team quit,they stated that his nose had been broken and the back of his head smashed in.His father in an interview with Fox 13 orlando also claimed his nose had been broken and the back of his head smashed in.His friend also claimed this as did his wife. They stated that the back of Georges head had been bashed against the pavement with such force he almost lost conciousness and his nose had been severely broken.

It's quite possible that all these people are lying and that George never told them any of that which would beg the question...why go out and lie to the media about the seriousness of Georges injuries?

Then there's this nugget from his brother appearing on Piers Morgan;

"George was out of breath, he was barely conscious, his last thing he remembers doing was moving his head from the concrete to the grass so that if he was banged one more time, he wouldn't be – you know – wearing diapers for the rest of his life and being spoon fed".

Get that?Spoon fed?EMT didn't even bandage the back of his head and he's worried about being spoon fed.

Would you like direct quotes from his ex-Lawyers,his wife,his friend,his father about his broken nose?


dublindave

"Not serious" is the "suggestion" of the NYDN not the EMS guys. You got something beside that or are you just lying again?

NYDN claims to have seen the EMT report which states that Zimmerman's injuries were not serious.EVEN if it's not a direct quote taken from the report I stand by the NYDN conclusion and here's why;no EMT unit will allow someone with injuries as serious as Zimmerman claimed he had sustained in the scuffle to go without further treatment.It simply isn't along the procedural lines that they're taught to follow.In fact the only way he's walking away from getting further treatment is if his injuries aren't serious.The Sandford PD are not going to take him into custody ingnoring a recomendation by the EMT for further treatment.The ABC tape of Zimmerman walking through the police station show a man with no blood stains on his shirt,no bandages on his nose or on the back of his head-again-EMT's are going to bandage up a serious injury.THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TAUGHT.

The conclusion;Zimmerman lied about the seriousness of his injuries.No bandages,no blood,no further treatment.

dublindave

These two dopes are just plain inadequate.

"They appear to think they are accomplishing something by repeatedly getting owned in a public forum"


"Getting owned"????What are you like 10 years old?

Talk like a man.I'm sorry,it grates on my nerves when men talk like little girls.

cboldt

-- I am not sure if Zimmerman said "he broke my nose" or not - but I do know that is probably what I would have said even if my nose wasn't broken --


I believe the evidence will show he was treated for a broken nose.


DublinDave is a self-admitted liar though. He says that exaggerating the extent of injury to "head smashed in," when the extent is not that, makes one a liar. But no Zimmerman account says the injury was "head smashed in." The exaggeration of claimed injury comes from DublinDave.


Better morons, please.

cboldt

I want to go back to my

And then Martin decks Zimmerman and gets the superior position, pounding his head on the pavement (we'll set aside that he's not grabbing the gun wrist, not shouting "GUN!!" or "DON'T SHOOT!!", etc.), which just enrages Zimmerman further, making him MORE determined to kill Martin.

In that scenario, Zimmerman is a murderer.


A couple of things would change the conclusion. In short, if, instead of enraging Zimmerman, the beating reasonably causes him to be in fear of death, Zimmerman obtains the right to use deadly force. The duration of the battle in this case provides room for abundant conjecture, and conjecture is what the prosecution is using to make its charge.

Extraneus

So both combatants could have had a reasonable fear of death, and therefore either of them could have been within their rights to kill the other in self-defense, right down to the final second, regardless of whatever led to the struggle?

It pays to be the guy with the gun in that scenario.

Chubby

((The bubumeister's back and he's got himself in trouble
Hey la, hey la
Bubumeister's back.))


DoT, it goes like this:

DoT went away and you, bubukkduda, hung around
And bothered us, every night
And when we wouldn't fall for your bs
Y'all said things that weren't very nice


DoT is back and you're gonna be in trouble
Hey-la-day-la DoT is back...
DoT is back and there's gonna be trouble ...

dublindave

"I believe the evidence will show he was treated for a broken nose."


But the evidence DOESN'T show he was treated for a broken nose.His nose wasn't bandaged in the ABC video taken shortly after EMT treated him.

You can be wilfully obtuse on an internet chat forum but it'll be a little more difficult for your buddy Zimmerman when he gets in front of a jury.


"DublinDave is a self-admitted liar though. He says that exaggerating the extent of injury to "head smashed in," when the extent is not that, makes one a liar.But no Zimmerman account says the injury was "head smashed in." The exaggeration of claimed injury comes from DublinDave."


Sigh.Jesus.

Zimmerman's brother relayed zimmerman's account of what happened during an interview with Piers Morgan.He stated that his brother told him his head was being smashed against to pavement SO HARD he had to move it to the grass because he feared he would get brain damadge.

I'm guessing Zimmerman's use of family/legal team to paint
a harsher picture of actually happened was to gain public support and head off a charge.Didn't work.


cboldt

I believe O'Mara's remark that he has to wait until the arraignment to start the 15 day "discovery" deadline is incorrect.

O'Mara replies: "Correct our rules suggest that I could get discovery beginning 15 days after arraignment. Right now arraignment is set for May 29th. That could be as late as June 15th. However, Ms. [Angela] Corey has, to her credit, worked out a schedule were I'll be starting to get that information beginning the end of this week, mostly next week, so she is willing to accelerate it but I do not have it as we sit here today."
Trayvon Martin: Mom says God will hold George Zimmerman accountable - Orlando Sentinel - April 16.

Florida Crim Pro Rule 3.220 is about the discovery process. It does not assign the start of the 15 day window to arraignment.

(a) Notice of Discovery. After the filing of the charging document, a defendant may elect to participate in the discovery process provided by these rules, including the taking of discovery depositions, by filing with the court and serving on the prosecuting attorney a "Notice of Discovery" which shall bind both the prosecution and defendant to all discovery procedures contained in these rules. Participation by a defendant in the discovery process ... shall be an election to participate in discovery and triggers a reciprocal discovery obligation for the defendant. [application to codefendants, and triggering of this election via making a public records request omitted]

(b) Prosecutor’s Discovery Obligation.

(1) Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state‘s possession or control: ...

a list of the names and addresses of all persons known to the prosecutor to have information that may be relevant to any offense charged or any defense thereto, or to any similar fact evidence to be presented at trial ... the statement of any person whose name is furnished in compliance with the preceding subdivision

cboldt

If DublinDave is willing to cite Zimmerman's brother for the proposition that Zimmerman's head was being smashed against the pavement (which is not the same as claiming his head is smashed in), then he needs to give similar credit to the claim that Zimmerman was treated for a broken nose.


Still, DublinDave's actions amount to a liar, under DublinDave's standard of exaggeration of injury.

cboldt

-- So both combatants could have had a reasonable fear of death, and therefore either of them could have been within their rights to kill the other in self-defense, right down to the final second, regardless of whatever led to the struggle? --


I think "regardless of what led to the struggle" isn't true, any more than "regardless of what on during the struggle" would be. The law is phrased to account for give and take, tables turning, the passage of time, and other aspects of the complex interaction of humans.


But effectively, I think your proposition is correct. Martin could have been in fear for his life in the split second he realized he was not going to obtain possession or control of Zimmerman's pistol. If Martin was the aggressor, he gave up his right to try to kill Zimmerman.

Chubby

((till, DublinDave's actions amount to a liar))

he said bluntly a few posts above that he himself would exaggerate the extent of his injuries at a crime scene.

the problem with the less intelligent libbies like duda is that they are so into groupthink they can't conceive of anyone thinking or acting unlike themselves.

Ignatz

--NYDN claims to have seen the EMT report which states that Zimmerman's injuries were not serious.EVEN if it's not a direct quote taken from the report I stand by the NYDN conclusion and here's why;no EMT unit will allow someone with injuries as serious as Zimmerman claimed he had sustained in the scuffle to go without further treatment.--

You do know that a person can only be treated to the the extent that person allows, right?
If Zimmerman refused treatment because he was distracted by, oh I don't know just shooting a guy it's entirely possible they stopped the bleeding and left him to it. I've had both a broken nose and broken hand, and while both hurt, I didn't even know I had either until the next day or two.

And it is a bald faced lie to say that the NYDN says it has seen the report or that the report says "not serious" or "not that serious".
It says it has seen a transcript of the EMS call which is what I quoted. I see you have at least stop putting quotes around your 'not serious' claims, you just replace them with another lie about what the NYDN article says.
Do you think having to lie to support your position and then telling a new one when caught in the first strengthens your fairy tale?

cboldt

Some intrepid reporter should apprise the public that O'Mara has been entitled to file a Notice of Discovery since the 13th of April. If he'd filed one on the 14th, he'd have the state's evidence by the 29th of April.


I don't know if O'Mara is being steamrolled as unaware of the recitation in the discovery rule; or if he is sandbagging the velocity of the prosecution for tactical or strategic purposes.

cboldt

-- less intelligent libbies like duda --


It's not merely lack of intelligence. DublinDave is morally and ethically corrupt.

DebinNC

The March 27 Nancy Grace transcript cboldt posted on the other thread contained Corey's answer re whether GZ, if TM hit him, would have the right to shoot him dead:
...........................................
COREY: Nancy, our laws are very clear that it has to be a forcible felony and that a reasonable person would have to believe that deadly force is necessary as opposed to just physical force, fighting back and that sort of thing. I`ve prosecuted a woman who shot her husband and killed him because he slapped her, and we argued that was not deadly force and she was convicted and sent to state prison.
............................................
Sounds like the prosecution will claim GZ should have met TM's "physical force" with his own "physical force" but, instead, criminally used "deadly force". Hope O'Mara can find a couple of jurors determined to follow the law and not emotional shouldda-wouldda-couldda entreaties.

Chubby

((It's not merely lack of intelligence. DublinDave is morally and ethically corrupt))

it is a sad commentary on our times that whom we now call "idiots" used to be called "moral idiots"

cboldt

-- Sounds like the prosecution will claim GZ should have met TM's "physical force" with his own "physical force" but, instead, criminally used "deadly force". --


The length of the fight cuts against that argument; as does Zimmerman's apparent physical disadvantage due to strength, reach, or whatever you want to assign to Martin being able to maintain a superior position. In other words, if Zimmerman is physically restrained from using other force, the fact that he didn't use other force can't be held against him.


Corey's comparison case is weak sauce. Of course you can't shoot somebody because they slapped you. Duh. Slapping somebody is not an action that reasonably causes fear of death or serious injury.

cboldt

-- Hope O'Mara can find a couple of jurors determined to follow the law and not emotional shouldda-wouldda-couldda entreaties. --


I don;t think there'd be a problem finding a jury. My observation is that it's a sad commentary on the justice system (prosecutor and judges) that we wonder if he can find a judge that will follow the law.

dublindave

"If Dublindave is willing to cite Zimmerman's brother for the proposition that Zimmerman's head was being smashed against the pavement(which is not the same as claiming his head was smashed in)"


So your contention is there's a difference between having one's head smashed against a pavement so hard that brain injury could occur and having one's head smashed in?

I guess if one ignores the obvious colloquelism and goes for the literal interpretation "smashed in" IE. the skull crushed leaving a gaping hole with the brain protruding,then you might have a point.Zimmerman didn't claim pieces of his brain were falling out all over Sandford.

But for the rest of us Joes,having your head "smashed in" amounts to a serious trauma,which Zimmerman through his surrogates claimed to have sustained and which is STILL,no matter how many strawmen you errect, a lie.

cboldt

-- But for the rest of us Joes, having your head "smashed in" amounts to a serious trauma, which Zimmerman through his surrogates claimed to have sustained --


There you go again. Lie, straight up.


The only claims made are head smashed into pavement; resulting in lacerations to the scalp and a fear that brain injury could occur.

dublindave

"You do know that a person can only be treated to the the extent that person allows, right?
If Zimmerman refused treatment because he was distracted by, oh I don't know just shooting a guy it's entirely possible they stopped the bleeding and left him to it."

He doesn't have the right to refuse medical treatment if he's being taken into police custody.If EMT deem his injuries are serious they are required to take him into "protective medical custody".If someone in police custody has a serious head trauma and is showing signs of a concussion,it would be grossly negligent to ignore suggestions for further medical treatment,EVEN if the person in custody refuses it.

"I've had both a broken nose and broken hand, and while both hurt, I didn't even know I had either until the next day or two."


Question;when you broke your nose was there alot of blood?Keep in mind the Mayo clinic link provided by another poster on this thread that dealt with broken noses.

"And it is a bald faced lie to say that the NYDN says it has seen the report or that the report says "not serious" or "not that serious".
It says it has seen a transcript of the EMS call which is what I quoted."

It would be intellectually dishonest for me to conintue to say that the EMS report states "not serious". But I stand by NYDN contention,the EMS report will show that his injuries were not that serious because the lack of follow up treatment,blood and bandages indicates this.



narciso

I missed this, no did Ace, for a week;


http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2012/04/the-selection-of-charges-in-the-zimmerman-case.html

narciso

And this, since we were just focusing on the facts


http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2012/04/trayvon-martin-angela-corey-and-prosecutors-ethics.html

cboldt

Florida's 15th judicial circuit DEEMS that a Notice of Discovery is filed, the moment the court assigns the case to the Office of the Public Defender!


Defense must notify the court and prosecutor if it does NOT want to participate in mutual discovery.


I don't think Zimmerman has anything to hide, and his burden of production would be trivial. Most (nearly all) of his witnesses are listed on the state's list; all he adds is relatives for the voice ID (to rebut Corey's use of Trayvon's mother).


The Notice of Discovery is 100% boilerplate, other than case number and name of the defendant.

Annoying Old Guy
your contention is there's a difference between having one's head smashed against a pavement so hard that brain injury could occur and having one's head smashed in?

Quite -- one is a potential injury and one is an actual injury. Normal people consider those distinct.

Extraneus

It would be intellectually dishonest for me

Heh.

Clarice

Flukerville.

President hauls Bo out of seclusion to the campaign trail; media whores on cue trot out Romney on top of station wagon story; new media trots out Obama dog eating tale

Priceless.

Clarice

Best of the twitters on dog eating--you decide--I like "My dog Skip & Dip"
http://www.mediaite.com/print/conservative-twitter-sphere-goes-wild-after-daily-caller-reveals-obama-consumed-dog-as-a-child/

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

The ethics article Narc linked to is by Monroe Freedman who is, like Dershowitz, of the liberal persuasion. Freedman is probably one of the two or three go to experts on attorney ethics. I have heard him on numerous national CLE panels over the years, and politics aside, he knows his stuff.

The article is most critical of the Corey performance at the charging news conference. It is really worth the read.

cboldt

Corey's production duty includes naming

all persons known to the prosecutor to have information that may be relevant to ... any defense [to the charge]

dublindave

-- But for the rest of us Joes, having your head "smashed in" amounts to a serious trauma, which Zimmerman through his surrogates claimed to have sustained --


There you go again. Lie, straight up.


"The only claims made are head smashed into pavement; resulting in lacerations to the scalp and a fear that brain injury could occur."

ROFLMAO

So now your saying that Zimmerman never stated he had received serious head injury,he just said that his head was being bashed into the pavement so hard he thought he might get brain damadge.

Nice.

From Zimmerman's brother;"George was out of breath, he was BARELY CONSIOUS, his last thing he remembers doing was moving his head from the concrete to the grass so that if he was banged one more time, he wouldn't be – you know – wearing diapers for the rest of his life and being spoon fed".

Now,just out of curiousity,could we assume that if someone is telling their brother that their skull was being smashed so hard into the pavement,almost loosing conciousness and one bang away from extensive brain damadge........that they received a serious head trauma?

Could we assume that?

Or will we go with your version of events;Zimmerman is not a liar because he never stated he suffered a serious head trauma,he just said his head was bashed against the concrete with such force he almost lost conciousness and feared he would be brain damadged for the rest of his life but other than that he's pefectly fine just a minor laceration.

I think in a court of law you'd be eaten alive.

derwill

That statement by Corey on the Nancy Grace show sounds to me as if she is either going to acknowledge that Martin was the aggressor in the struggle that "ensued," or at the least that she can't prove that he wasn't the aggressor. Thus, her contention is going to be that M's aggression (punch in the nose, slamming head into the ground) didn't warrant the response it provoked from Z.

I would expect that most of the jury deliberation is going to be taken up by two considerations:

Could Z. have ended the beating M. was giving him by running away? Not if you accept the word of the eye-witnesses who put Z lying on the ground with M. on top of him.

And, was Z.'s fear for his life reasonable if the beating were to go on?

cboldt

-- Could we assume that? --


Not reasonably. But, liars aren't bound by reason, ethics, or morals. You are just a corrupt bastard with time on your hands, spouting nonsense. Knock yourself out.

DebinNC

from "Underground" by Barack Obama

Under water grottos, caverns
Filled with apes
That eat figs.
...

Maybe it wasn't the caverns that were filled with fig-eating apes, but young Obama.

cboldt

-- I would expect that most of the jury deliberation is going to be taken up by two considerations: --


Rather than call it "jury," I'll refer to it as finder of fact, because this case should be concluded without going to trial.


You need to add a third consideration, and that is, if you find Zimmerman credible, whether or not a person whose opponent has given a verbal death threat while simultaneously attempting to take possession of a firearm creates a reasonable fear of death.


Corey has to make Zimmerman an out-and-out liar.

DebinNC

all persons known to the prosecutor to have information that may be relevant

Corey will have to produce Miss Cleo or whatever psychic read GZ's mind and reported what the sworn affidavit claims GZ "assumed".."felt"...and "perceived"

Devil's Advocate

I think Tm started the fight. I don't think TM knocked GZ down otherwise he would have stomped him instead of climbing on top of him.
I think, like most fights, they hit the ground in a clinch with TM on top swingin away. GZ hit his head when they hit the ground. It's slightly different then GZ's version but experience gives me some insight.
GZ probably is spinning his version of events but essentially he's telling the truth.

Devil's Advocate

Aaaaaargh typos!

cboldt

-- I don't think TM knocked GZ down otherwise he would have stomped him instead of climbing on top of him --


Somebody on Team Zimmerman has Martin putting his hand over Zimmerman's mouth and telling him to shut the fuck up.


Team Martin's theory is full of holes - it is flat out not believable. The timeline, the "fear", if they concede that Martin dilly dallied away from home, approached Zimmerman, then threw the first punch, they are screwed. Those actions are consistent with an angry man; not a reasonable man.

Ignatz

--He doesn't have the right to refuse medical treatment if he's being taken into police custody.If EMT deem his injuries are serious they are required to take him into "protective medical custody".--

You make up so much shit it's hard to keep track.
Give me a citation for more of your infamous quotation marks.

Are you being intellectually dishonest again?
And please tell me what the difference is between intellectually dishonest and just being a liar.

Devil's Advocate

The covering his mouth is unlikely too. TM supposedly pinned GM's shoulders down with his knees. That would be a good fart on your little brother position but too far up said brother's trunk to make punching easy. GZ is telling the truth as he saw it. It's like France losing Algeria and Indochina because they were "stabbed in the back." GZ was being beaten by a 17 year old-a BIG 17 year old- humbling and terrfying rxperience that needed some kind of explanation. I still the think the evidence justifies GZ's action and agree, as always with Cboldt
There is no way the fight took place where and when it took place without TM iniating the altercation.

DebinNC

Somebody on Team Zimmerman has Martin...

What counts is what GZ told police immediately, not what his dad/brother got second-hand. The hand-over-mouth story sounds very unlikely to me, as imo TM needed both his hands initially to control GZ and then to keep the gun at bay.

Chubby

I've not read Jeralyn often, but from what I have read, she seems to be an intellectually honest lefty. mendacious, juvenile and lost souls like duda would profit themselves so much more by hanging around honest lefties than they do agitpropping conservative blogs with bs that even the honest lefties would find ludicrous.

otoh, if duda and his type frequented honest lefty blogs, many here would be deprived of their daily fun

tough call

cboldt

-- The covering his mouth is unlikely too. TM supposedly pinned GM's shoulders down with his knees. --


I hadn't read the detail about being pinned using knees (or if I did, I've forgotten it). As for Zimmerman's mouth being covered, I don't mean to say that it was always covered. That, with the "shut up" could have been a short duration part of the fight.


Martin has some distinct physical advantages, particularly his height and reach; probably his cardio-vascular condition; and probably his strength.


-- GZ is telling the truth as he saw it --


Probably a bit of fog of war there. But no advantage to fabricating the detail that part of the fight was an attempt to stifle his voice.

derwill

The nature of Z's injuries, regardless of their severity, support his side of the story: blow to the face, head being slammed into the ground. The grass stains on his back, as observed by the cop on the scene, also support his story: that he scooted off the pavement and onto the ground during the beat-down, because of what Martin was doing to his head. And that goes to his state of mind at the time of the shooting--fear for his life. The question then becomes: Was that fear reasonable given the circumstances to warrant a reaction of self-defense?

(I'm leaving out Z's assertion that M. saw the gun and threatened to kill him, because unlike the first two assertions, there's no physical evidence to support it. However, the fact that the rest of his version of what happened is supported by the physical evidence--broken nose, lacerations on the back of the head, grass stains on his back, and the eyewitnesses that put him on the bottom--that does at least serve to support his credibility as a whole)

In any event, I see a world of difference between the reasonableness of fearing that a slap to the face could lead to one's death, versus having one's head repeatedly slammed into the ground.

cboldt

-- TM needed both his hands initially to control GZ and then to keep the gun at bay. --


My impression of Zimmerman's account is that Martin was unaware that Zimmerman was armed, until about 5 or 10 seconds (my guess as to time, but it was late in the fight) before the gun went off.


If Martin assumes Zimmerman is unarmed, Martin would want to keep Zimmerman's hands "at bay" just enough to keep from getting hit where it might hurt.


-- What counts is what GZ told police immediately, not what his dad/brother got second-hand. --


Absolutely agree. I've presumed that father and brother recountings are consistent with the story Zimmerman gave during his initial interrogation.

Extraneus

Corey will have to produce Miss Cleo or whatever psychic read GZ's mind and reported what the sworn affidavit claims GZ "assumed".."felt"...and "perceived"

Heh. "Falsely assumed," too.

I haven't read many of these, but are they usually peppered with such unprovable words?

Some guy

DubDave,

So all you know about the EMTs, is what you read in NYDN? That's it? Really?

How embarrassing.

dublindave

-- Could we assume that? --


"Not reasonably. But, liars aren't bound by reason, ethics, or morals. You are just a corrupt bastard with time on your hands, spouting nonsense. Knock yourself out."


We can't "reasonably" assume that if Zimmerman began to experience some loss of conciousness after having his head smashed off a concrete pavement, that would imply a serious head trauma had occured?

We can't "reasonably" assume that?

What else would cause a loss of conciousness around the time a person claims to be having their head smashed off a concrete pavement IF NOT the concrete pavement.

The only "reasobable" thing to assume is that having his head battered against the ground caused his supposed loss of conciousness AND THAT is a direct result of a serious injury.

Now,if the EMT unit that are trained in detecting such injuries examined Zimmerman and found nothing wrong,could we also assume that Zimmerman's account of what happened during the struggle with Martin isn't 100 per cent accurate?

Could assume that that's a possibility?

And if Zimmerman's account of what happened during the struggle with Trayvon martin (that caused him to kill Martin) isn't a hundred per cent accurate,wont a jury have difficulty believing he acted in self defence?


It's a dud.

It's assault if a person is medically treated without their permission. Dud claims EMT and police routinely, as a matter of policy and protocol, assault people.
================

chas


Posted by: Devil's Advocate | April 18, 2012 at 10:47 AM

very doubtful. mainly due to police arriving so quickly. making up a story takes more than the very short time frame allowed. doing so in that little time would mean he would contradict himself repeatedly. to lie convincingly to people trained in detecting deception when you have no time to rehearse your story is very unlikely.

Extraneus

I think Tm started the fight. I don't think TM knocked GZ down otherwise he would have stomped him instead of climbing on top of him.
I think, like most fights, they hit the ground in a clinch with TM on top swingin away. GZ hit his head when they hit the ground.

This makes the most sense to me. After cold-cocking Zimmerman, Martin may have tried to push him down and got dragged down with him.

Can you really believe yourself?  How amusant.

Dub, you are ignorant of medicine, of police and EMT procedures, and you are making up scenarios out of your ignorance. Your whole schtick about the 'seriousness' of the injuries is illogical and fantastical.
==================

Devil's Advocate

Oh I know some very able BSers who could and do do it. I am not saying GZ is lying. He is spinning a bit. It is the truth as he saw it and it fits the timeline and the forensics.
The witnesses describe the struggle almost like the combatants were in the missionary position. TM probably never saw the gun.
GZ drew it in desperation. TM in my opinioned started the fight. He was winning the fight and GZ was definately terrified. Listen to the screams.
The guy who helped everyone else screamed for help and nobody helped him.

Chas, i too have always been impressed and swayed GZ's consistancy.

Devil's Advocate

Abouthe the 13 year old witness. Does anyone else think he saw almost everything and was very traumatised?

cboldt

-- Does anyone else think he saw almost everything and was very traumatised? --


I don't know if he saw the whole thing, but if he did, he won't testify to it out of intimidation.

cboldt

If Corey and the governor can be intimidated by a lynch mob, what's to say a 13 year old might be likewise persuaded to see nothing?

Devil's Advocate

to the extent that his memory was effected?

Devil's Advocate

sorry my last post was meant to follow my previous post immediatey but Cboldt apparently figured that out.

DebinNC

UPI says GZ case judge will relinquish control of the case today.

DebinNC


"One of the three remaining felony judges in Seminole County would replace Recksiedler, the Sentinel said. They are John Galluzzo, on the bench five years; Kenneth Lester Jr., a 15-year judge; and Debra S. Nelson, a judge for 13 years."

Devil's Advocate

There was a case last year in MPLS where a man saw two men on the walking path in fron of him, and assuming he was going to be mugged, pulled his knife out of his pocket.
The young lads demanded money. They had no weapons but I assume they threatoned bodily harm. One was stabbed and died while trying to chase the intended victim. The intended victim was not charged.

Enlightened

"Fist; meet gun"

Again we have Cleo The Clairovoyant who knows for a fact that George Zimmerman knew for a fact Trayvon Martin was unarmed as Trayvon was beating him. Except for that troubling little statement GZ made to 911 that the suspicious person was "reaching for his waistband".


Let me fix it for you:

Fist, and any other weapon this assailant may have - meet gun.

Seriously - repeating the same shit ad nauseum without the facts ever changing just points to your obvious insanity.

cboldt
In May, Carlos Catalan-Flores, 26, a security guard at a Tampa strip club called Flash Dancers, confronted men who were drinking beer in the parking lot. One of the men threw a beer bottle at Catalan-Flores' head and prepared to throw another.

Rather than taking cover inside the club, or using his baton or pepper spray to protect himself, Catalan-Flores drew his weapon and began firing. Several of the six shots hit the man who threw the beer.

A judge ruled that Catalan-Flores was justified, even though he initiated the confrontation. Being hit by a beer bottle constitutes a forcible felony, so he had the right to shoot, to protect himself.

Some guy

"Fist; meet gun"

Better morons, please

Showing up to a gun fight with only a fist takes the finest of morons.

Devil's Advocate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Durst

Want to read about an unlikely successful self defense claim?

cboldt

A case that Corey no billed, herself.
Suspect and shooting victim part of 'close-knit' group meeting at Jacksonville cafe - Dec 4, 2011


Artur Veshti ... was charged with murder, according to a Jacksonville Sheriff's Office arrest report. ...


The shooting occurred about midnight. When police arrived, a man was lying in the area behind the restaurant with gunshot wounds. ...

Veshti left the scene of the shooting but returned within an hour or two later ...

Witnesses told police that Veshti and Gavoci "had some words" and both walked away, and later shots were heard

Some guy

Here's a good defense strategy for GZ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie_defense


He should use the 'crazy democrat' defense? You sure?

Enlightened

"Is that code for 'jury sub horn'?

Because, that's who the defense has to convince. You're easy."

No -its code for you.are.insane.


cboldt

Jacksonville defense attorney Mitchell Stone says Corey's office made the decision not to charge Artur Veshti, who shot and killed Stone's client, Paulin Gavoci, after deciding Veshti acted in response to reasonable fear for his life.

BlahBlahBlah

"I don't know if he saw the whole thing, but if he did, he won't testify to it out of intimidation."

I agree the intimidation factor is extreme in this case (yay for Jackson's Justice Seekers! *sigh*)

Question though; if the two sides agree to allow his statements to police to be entered as evidence, would he need to?

Not that I think its likely, but curious

BlahBlahBlah

"Again we have Cleo The Clairovoyant who knows for a fact that George Zimmerman knew for a fact Trayvon Martin was unarmed..."

uhm, its Clara; Clara Clairvoyant...

Consultations 10 to 4

cboldt

-- Question though; if the two sides agree to allow his statements to police to be entered as evidence, would he need to? --


The state is obliged to produce ALL of its evidence to the defense. The investigator's record of the interview is potentially relevant to either prosecution or defense, so is to be produce to the defendant. If we believe the mother's account of how the kids's testimony was elicited (multiple choice on color of clothing), I might find the testimony not compelling.


If EITHER side insists, and the judge agrees, the kid can be compelled to testify.

Chubby

Cboldt, in case you haven't seen it already, Rush today recommended this piece from PJ media:

Bob Owens
Walking Papers? The Incredibly Thin, Speculative Zimmerman Affidavit
Angela Corey's filing against George Zimmerman bears the hallmarks of a career-ender.

LUN

cboldt

I wouldn't make him testify. There are other witnesses. He's got trouble enough, living in a town with an active thug base. Plus he's likely to lie on the stand (recanting his previous statement) due to fear of retribution.

Devil's Advocate

What about the unaccounted for 2:30 minutes?
Was GZ too impatient waiting for the police?
Was it then that he walked up to the fateful T in the road? Did he walk to the street first and the back to the T? It would explain the missing time. How far did TM run?
I say not far. He was in the shadows talking to his friend, who I'm guessing he wished was his girlfriend, Dee Dee. He might have been making his way to the sidewalk when GZ turned the corner. The police chief seemed to hint that TM had started home when he spotted GZ and turned around to go back and "mouth off."

cboldt

-- in case you haven't seen it already, Rush today recommended this piece from PJ media --


Thanks Chubby. I saw that yesterday. Glad to hear that Limbaugh is suggesting people take an interest in the case.

Porchlight

Jacksonville defense attorney Mitchell Stone says Corey's office made the decision not to charge Artur Veshti, who shot and killed Stone's client, Paulin Gavoci, after deciding Veshti acted in response to reasonable fear for his life.

Aha. Another piece of the puzzle. Remember a few days back after Corey's presser when we were discussing whether she was treating this case differently than similar cases in the past? NK argued that she was not, but I didn't think we had enough info (at the time) to make a determination.

Devil's Advocate

The problem though is Rush preaches to the choir. Rush's suggestions will not be listened to by a good segment of our land

cboldt
Earlier this year, [Jacksonville defense attorney Mitchell] Stone says he was defending a woman charged with slashing a man she said attacked her, and Corey proceeded with charges until the judge dismissed the case finding that the woman had acted in self-defense.
The fact patterns in this case, and in the Veshti case, are not easy to come by.
cboldt

-- The problem though is Rush preaches to the choir. Rush's suggestions will not be listened to by a good segment of our land --


The choir is busy, and the criticism of Corey is somewhat low-key at this time. I think that even though Limbaugh is preaching to the choir, a few will be hearing something new, and a few heads will turn.


As for those who have adopted Team Martin, well, I'm still waiting for a well-reasoned remark from one of them.

dublindave

"Dub, you are ignorant of medicine, of police and EMT procedures, and you are making up scenarios out of your ignorance. Your whole schtick about the 'seriousness' of the injuries is illogical and fantastical."

The perceived danger Martin posed is going to be central to Zimmerman's self defence claim.If there's a disparity between Zimmerman's version of events and what the EMT report states(and it's obvious that there is)that's going to be a problem for him.

derwill

Wow, that PJ Media piece thoroughly eviscerates Corey's affidavit. It's one thing to throw what even liberal lawyers are labeling a piece of carp there for consumption by the media and the mob, but she's going to have to go before a judge and defend that thing. Not saying it will happen, but she's risking a humiliating slap down by the judge.

jimmyk

So, to play devil's advocate, or to think about how Corey could mount some kind of case:

A couple details that haven't been clear are how, if GZ was underneath Trayvon and unable to stand his ground or fight back without deadly force, how did GZ (a) get from the pavement to the lawn; (b) get his arms free to draw and fire his weapon?

For (a), he would have had to somehow slide toward his feet to get his head from the pavement onto the grass, with TM still on top of him. Then he would had to have one or both arms sufficiently free to grab his weapon from the holster, position it between him and TM, and fire.

I'm sure there's a story there, but I suspect the prosecution will want those details and will allege that if he could do all that, he could have done something short of killing TM. I don't think the law requires that kind of fine tuning for someone under attack, but that would seem to be their best shot at convincing a judge or jury.

BlahBlahBlah

"If EITHER side insists, and the judge agrees, the kid can be compelled to testify."

Oh yeah, know that.

But I'm asking if say both sides want the kids police interview statements, but both also want to save the kid from having to take the stand. Could they come together and agree to allow the statements as fact without calling actually having to call him?

cboldt

-- Could they come together and agree to allow the statements as fact without calling actually having to call him? --


I'm thinking probably not. They can stipulate any facts they want to, including observations made by the young witness.


Somebody with a better working knowledge of rules of evidence may know if an available witness can testify via sworn statement.

Chubby

derwill,

rush suggested the possiblity of a judge who won't have any higher standards than Corey. It could happen.

Extraneus

The problem though is Rush preaches to the choir.

But those people talk to other people, just like we're doing here. I'll admit that the lefties we've attracted in these threads aren't of the highest caliber, but perhaps even they click a link on occasion.

derwill

Yeah, I know that Chubby. It's going to be the luck of the draw for Z's defense.

One question: Does either side have the right to an appeal re this immunity due to self-defense case? From what I understand, judges hate to get slapped down by an appellate court, so that might temper whatever finding he/she comes up with.

DebinNC

Bob Owens: "Unbeknownst to Zimmerman at the time was the fact that Martin had been suspended from school for the possession of a “burglary tool.”

That's incorrect, if the Miami Herald's report on TM's suspensions is right. TM wasn't even disciplined for the bookbag cache/screwdriver find, since subsequent efforts to prove the jewelry was stolen came up empty. TM was "serving time" for the baggie w/marijuana residue+pipe episode, which might play into GZ's "on drugs or something" description to the dispatcher.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame