I’m saying getting your head banged into a solid object is a potentially deadly event that will be perceived as such with very few blows.
He moved after being shot. Why are you assuming he died instantly?
Sigh…
And monkeys are flying out of my butt.
If you don’t think it’s likely that he was capable of moving for a short time after being shot, you’ve seen too many films.
It’s possible that he was killed instantly, but it shouldn’t be a default assumption. The autopsy report will probably say for sure, though.
If it doesn’t say he did, there is reasonable doubt that he died in exactly the place and position he fell when he was shot.
George Zimmerman was acquitted by a jury of his peers. The system worked. There’s no need to change the Stand Your Ground laws.
Trayvon Martin’s killer has been tried and convicted. The system worked. There’s no need to change the Stand Your Ground laws.
I predict something similar to one of these statements will be uttered by SYG proponents in the aftermath of a trial if there is one.
Right. We’re supposed to believe that Trayvon, fatally shot in the chest and with Zimmerman standing over his soon to be lifeless body, decided to do a 180 degree turn around so that he is lying face down over the grass instead of towards the sidewalk.
I don’t find that part difficult to believe at all. He could have thrashed; he could have rolled; he could have crawled. He could have gotten up, walked a few steps, then collapsed.
And yet this account differs from Zimmerman’s claim, confirmed at the bond hearing, that he went to check a street sign and then headed back to this car when he was attacked. It also contradicts Daddy Zimmerman’s emphatic letter shortly after this gained national attention, that insisted that Z never followed or confronted Martin.
If checking a street sign was incidental to the real purpose he contined to walk around the area for a full four minutes or so after the 911 call ended, then it’s disingenuous for him to point to it as a reason he was outside his truck. The state can easily show how long it should have taken him to look for the sign. The location of the shooting totally belies Zimmy’s street sign claim too.
Do you think the defense will be able to find any experts willing to say that it wasn’t Martin on that tape? Sounds like the best they can do is attack the other side’s experts.
If the state has five different analysts, all either ruling out Zimmerman or attributing the screams to Martin based on their techniques, plus ear witnesses who say it was a despondent boy yelling, the defense will have hard time destroying this persuasiveness to a jury.
[ul]
[li]There were no boys involved in the struggle. There was a 17 year old man and a 28 year man. Frankly calling someone who is 6’3" a ‘boy’ sounds retarded.[/li]
[li]Nobody in this thread or any any of the potential local witnesses has any idea what Martin’s voice sounded like. He might have had a deeper register than Zimmerman for all we know.[/li]
[li]No jury is going to hear Owen, because his testimony doesn’t meet Florida standards. I would also to point out that I was right when I said that Owen’s statements sounded like BS to me.[/li]
[li]I have already stated that when I listened to the 911 recording and ran some frequency analysis on the screaming. It appears to me that two people were screaming.[/li][/ul]
Answer my question. Do you think the defense will be able to find expert analysts who will say that was Zimmerman on that tape?
They can attack any experts the State puts on the stand (Owen or anyone else), but if they cant find any credible authority willing to assert that was Zimmerman (or at least not Martin), the deck is still stacked against Zimmerman.
17-year-olds are kids. They are minors. Many cannot drive. They can’t drink, smoke, or gamble. Their brains are not fully mature. Many are still growing. They are fundamentally different from people eleven years older than they are. Saying that Martin was a kid–boy, young man, child, teenager, youth–is not a moral judgment. It’s a statement of fact.
If Martin had been a female, we’d be calling her a girl. And not even the most hard-core feminist would be upset by it. The only reason for not distinguishing Zimmerman and Martin’s ages is yet another attempt to draw some false equivalence between the two.
Yes. The defense will find experts who will say it is Zimmerman screaming. Count on it.
There will be no expert forensic voice testimony because nothing meets Florida standards.
I find it interesting that no one has published any video of Trayvon talking. In 2012, with all the cell phone video cameras, it seems odd. I suspect the reason is the same as why we didn’t see any recent photos of Trayvon until the Twitter pictures of Trayvon appeared. It will turn out that he doesn’t have a boy’s voice. He will sound like a grown man.
I know of no 17 old males who sound like 28 year olds. Even those with deep voices do not sound like adults.There is a whole field dedicated to voice analysis, and I’m sure experts in the field disagree with you.
Your whole argument is silly anyway. Even Zimmerman was able to take one look at him and place him in his late teens. He wouldn’t have been able to do that if there wasnt something distinctively adolescent about the kid. It’s unlikely his voice also didn’t have signs of youth.
I doubt the defense will be able find a bonafide expert willing to risk their credibility to assert that was Zimmerman, but we’ll see. The real challenge will be for Zimmerman to reconcile his statement with all that screaming in a believable way. For instance, why would Zimmerman–if he truly was trying to make a good faith effort to stop the fight–yell for outsiders to help rather than use all that generous lung capacity to threaten to shoot Martin.
10 percent of all murders in the U.S. are committed by people under 18. Trayvon was old enough to enlist in the army. He was old enough to smoke pot. He was old enough to get a driver’s license. I had a driver license when I was younger than Trayvon. He was old enough to left at Green’s house while he Dad and his dad’e girlfriend went out and he was watching Green’s son. Calling him a kid or a boy is an exercise in semantics, to make him sound like a victim. All the things you mention would not magically changed when he turned 18. Calling him a boy or a kid is that same trick as the pictures of him at 12.
This is bananas, man.
You can still call Martin a “kid” and think any ole bad thing about him that you want. I know plenty of bad-ass kids. We all do.
If you have a hard time calling him a “boy”, don’t. But you are wrong if you think he was an adult. He wasn’t, by any legal or social definition.
17 year-old males are boys. Get over it.
Old enough to smoke pot? Wtf?
You still don’t understand the rules. Shoot or don’t shoot, don’t threaten to shoot. Don’t point your firearm at people. Don’t fire warning shots. It will look bad in court. It would indicate that you weren’t in fear for your life. I don’t necessarily think the rules make sense, but I didn’t write them.