Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread

[you_with_the_face]

@you_with_the_face

And if Martin was perpendicular to the ground when he was shot, the vertical axis of Zimmerman’s gun would have most likely been ____ to Martin’s chest, for the bullet’s path to be straight and horizontal.

You fill in the blank. Here are your choices.

1. Parallel

2. Perpendicular

3. at a 45% degree angle

4. at a 100% degree angle

Zimmerman claims he was lying on the ground when he shot the kid. He claims he shot the kid while simultaneously pinning Martin’s arm with his shooting arm, which means Martin had to have been leaning over him at an angle. From this extremely close and uncomfortable position, how likely is it that Zimmerman would have pointed his gun at exactly the right angle needed to achieve the type of trajectory you’d usually see if the gun was aimed and fired from an upright position, at an upright target?

Show your work.

Also, while you’re at it, reconcile all of this with the finding that the gun was fired at an intermediate range. It was not a contact shot like you’d expect if Martin’s left arm was pinned by Zimmerman’s.

[doorhinge]

@JoelUpchurch

The actual ME report on the path of the projectile:

Skin, left anterior; 5th intercostal space; pericardial sac; RIGHT VENTRICLE; RIGHT LOWER LOBE OF LUNG.

This translates into a projectile that is going from left side of Martin’s chest to the right side.
BTW Biodigital Human is handy here since you can turn off the organ you aren’t interested in.

Everything is relative. The 5th intercostal space turns and moves upward at an angle following bewteen the ribs. The pericardial sac and the right ventricle of the heart are located in the left chest. That translates into a wound channel that goes straight from front to back not left to right. The bullet does appear to have fragmented which explains hole in the right lung.

http://www.indexedvisuals.com/scripts/ivstock/pic.asp?id=294-007

[VinylTurnip]

@Bricker

Is the prosecution going to be calling Anatole France as a witness, Vinyl Turnip?

Analtoe. And only if I’m called.

[doorhinge]

@Fear_Itself

Then how did it travel through the left side of his chest, through the heart, and stop in his right lung? That’s one Magic Bullet.

No, it was a hollow point. It’s only your misunderstanding of where the human heart is located in the chest that is confusing you.

[Shodan]

@you_with_the_face

It was not a contact shot like you’d expect if Martin’s left arm was pinned by Zimmerman’s.

Do you have a cite or something from an objective third party that one would expect a contact wound in that situation? It could have happened that way, but if it wasn’t a contact wound, I doubt anyone objective would think that proved anything.

Regards,
Shodan

[doorhinge]

@you_with_the_face

And if Martin was perpendicular to the ground when he was shot, the vertical axis of Zimmerman’s gun would have most likely been ____ to Martin’s chest, for the bullet’s path to be straight and horizontal.

You still seem to hung up on “the ground” being relative to the bullets path. The guns barrel was perpendicular to Martin’s chest when the shot was fired.

[Terr]

@Shodan

Do you have a cite or something from an objective third party that one would expect a contact wound in that situation? It could have happened that way, but if it wasn’t a contact wound, I doubt anyone objective would think that proved anything.

The forensic evidence that is released says it was a contact shot.

[Terr]

@you_with_the_face

Zimmerman claims he was lying on the ground when he shot the kid. He claims he shot the kid while simultaneously pinning Martin’s arm with his shooting arm, which means Martin had to have been leaning over him at an angle. From this extremely close and uncomfortable position, how likely is it that Zimmerman would have pointed his gun at exactly the right angle needed to achieve the type of trajectory you’d usually see if the gun was aimed and fired from an upright position, at an upright target?

Easy. Martin leaning over Zimmerman at 45 degrees angle, and Zimmerman pointing the gun at 45 degrees. Or Martin leaning over Zimmerman at 60 degrees and Zimmerman pointing the gun at 30 degrees. Etc.

[Terr]

@you_with_the_face

Also, while you’re at it, reconcile all of this with the finding that the gun was fired at an intermediate range. It was not a contact shot like you’d expect if Martin’s left arm was pinned by Zimmerman’s.

The forensic evidence says that the gun was in contact with Martin’s clothes when it was fired. The “intermediate range” (which is several inches) is for the skin stippling, and that is explained by Martin’s loose clothes.

[Shodan]

The autopsy says Martin was shot from “intermediate range”, and as far as I can tell you are correct.

From here -

Intermediate Range Definition: Hot powder grains accompany bullet to wound site & are driven into skin, leaving small red marks on skin - stippling/tattooing

Short & Close Range Definition: Bullet hole, stippling & soot present

Contact Range Definition: Bullet hole, muzzle burn mark & impression of firearm present; loose fit - near contact; cornea of soot may be present where weapon not placed directly against skin

Direct contact is pretty obvious when the gun is against the skin. However, as one report explained, an “intermediate” result would occur even over a distance of an inch or two if the victim was wearing clothing or standing, for example, behind a door because most of the powder and gas would be blocked by the obstacle.

Regards,
Shodan

[Terr]

@Shodan

The autopsy says Martin was shot from “intermediate range”, and as far as I can tell you are correct.

The autopsy does - that’s the determination from examining the skin “stippling”. That could mean several inches distance.

Another piece of forensic evidence is examination of Martin’s clothes, which indicates a contact shot - see http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf page 122

The two determinations taken together mean that the gun was in contact with Martin’s clothes when it fired, and the clothes were hanging a few inches away from his skin - which is consistent with Martin’s leaning over when he was shot.

[Larry_Mudd]

I see that GZ’s application for a concealed carry permit is included in the evidence to be released Thursday. Do you suppose this means he lied on the application about avoiding adjudication on the assault charge? Or would there be some other reason that it would be in evidence?

[you_with_the_face]

@Shodan

Do you have a cite or something from an objective third party that one would expect a contact wound in that situation? It could have happened that way, but if it wasn’t a contact wound, I doubt anyone objective would think that proved anything.

Regards,
Shodan

It’ll come up in trial I suspect. We can see what the experts say then.

Me, personally, think it’s quite precious to believe that Martin was shot in his upper chest–straight-to-back-- by someone who supposedly was in a supine position and who claims to have drawn his gun from his hip.

[Shodan]

@Larry_Mudd

I see that GZ’s application for a concealed carry permit is included in the evidence to be released Thursday. Do you suppose this means he lied on the application about avoiding adjudication on the assault charge? Or would there be some other reason that it would be in evidence?

Maybe to prove he was carrying the gun legally.

Regards,
Shodan

[Larry_Mudd]

@Shodan

Maybe to prove he was carrying the gun legally.

According to the Sentinel this is prosecution’s evidence, so that seems unlikely.

[Shodan]

@you_with_the_face

Me, personally, think it’s quite precious to believe that Martin was shot in his upper chest–straight-to-back-- by someone who supposedly was in a supine position and who claims to have drawn his gun from his hip.

See post #3408.

[QUOTE=Larry Mudd]

According to the Sentinel this is prosecution’s evidence, so that seems unlikely.
[/QUOTE]

Wouldn’t the prosecution have to release all the evidence they have, not just the evidence that they think proves Zimmerman is guilty?

So it would run
[ul][li]The prosecution requests a copy of Zimmerman’s CCW permit, to see if they can get him on a weapons charge at least.[]It turns out his application is fine, but they hang onto it anyway. []It gets included in this evidence dump because the prosecution has it.[/ul]This is all speculation on my part, of course. [/li]
Addressing myself to Bricker or one of the other Great Legal Minds of the SDMB[sup]TM[/sup] - does the prosecution have to hold onto evidence after they request it, even if it doesn’t prove anything one way or the other? I imagine it might get a little uncomfortable at a discovery hearing if the prosecuting attorney said, “Oh yeah - that evidence? It didn’t show that your client was guilty, so we pitched it.”

Regards,
Shodan

[doorhinge]

@Larry_Mudd

According to the Sentinel this is prosecution’s evidence, so that seems unlikely.

The prosecution’s job should be to gather as much evidence about this case as possible. It seems reasonable then for them to determine whether the State of Florida OK’d Zimmerman’s owning and carrying a firearm. If he hadn’t been given the OK by FLA, they could have charged him with illegally carrying a firearm in FLA.

[Boyo_Jim]

@Shodan

…Wouldn’t the prosecution have to release all the evidence they have, not just the evidence that they think proves Zimmerman is guilty? …

Ahem… speaking from my extensive knowledge garnered from the on-air legal telcouse Law & Order…

It depends how you define ‘evidence’. The police collect all kinds of shit at a crime scenes or the homes/workplaces of victims and suspects, not always knowing which of it will ultimately be relevant. The general rule is that anything the prosecution finds that is relevant to the case, pointing toward either guilt or innocence, must be disclosed to the defense. Those items that might tend to support a theory of guilt may or may not be used by the prosecution during the presentation of their case, and the notice to the defense allows them to consider strategies to counter the evidence. And certainly the defense would be very interested in any evidence that point toward innocence.

Then there’s other stuff. For instance, the police collect a bunch of shoes to look for evidence of one matching a footprint at a crime scene, but don’t find any. Are the shoes evidence? I don’t think so. OTOH, it might be relative to the defense that the police were unable to find any of the defendant’s shoes that matched the prints at the scene – particularly if, say, the print was from a different size shoe than the defendant wears. So it may be that test results of things become evidence, while the things themselves don’t

So, the gun permit application… maybe Bricker can come along and clarify whether an “in between” thing like this really is evidence. It would certainly be exculpatory evidence if Zimmerman were charged with some kind of “illegal possession of a firearm” crime, but AFAIK he’s not.

[Boyo_Jim]

@doorhinge

The prosecution’s job should be to gather as much evidence about this case as possible. It seems reasonable then for them to determine whether the State of Florida OK’d Zimmerman’s owning and carrying a firearm. If he hadn’t been given the OK by FLA, they could have charged him with illegally carrying a firearm in FLA.

Yes, but since they didn’t make any weapons charge, the item is presumably not relevant to the crime that is charged.

Calling Bricker – is anything collected by the police considered ‘evidence’, or is it only evidence after one side or the other decide it’s relevant and try to introduce it as evidence during the trial?

[Jack_Batty]

@Boyo_Jim

Calling Bricker – is anything collected by the police considered ‘evidence’, or is it only evidence after one side or the other decide it’s relevant and try to introduce it as evidence during the trial?

I’m wondering that too. Somehow I think if the prosecution interviewed Zimmerman’s neighbor who told them he was sure he was guilty because the Mole People from Planet RootCeller beamed the info to him through his clock radio … I don’t think they’d include that in discovery, “evidence” though it be.