What?
I am strongly suggesting that this particular injury was caused by asphyxia.
He had the brain injury.
I gave a case study which talks about the types of brain injuries that result from asphyxia. The one that Martin sustained is one of them.
Can we look at inductive reasoning here?
personally, both.
Where in the autopsy does it mention asphyxia?
Magiver,
Please reread the passages and the case study.
Reread my comments about that.
Can you see the implications I am making?
As I stated before, I think it was a COMBINATION of Martin’s brain injuries and the obvious gunshot wound which lead the Medical Examiner to call it a homicide.
Why are you assuming it was caused by lack of oxygen to the brain due to asphyxiation, not lack of oxygen to the brain due to a gunshot wound to the heart and lungs?
What evidence do you have for asphyxiation - either witness evidence or physical evidence on Martin’s body, not idle speculation.
And, more generally, why are you constantly suggesting, believing, speculating, and so forth, things that you can’t support with evidence, just with more speculation?
No I do not see the implications you’re making. It’s a simple matter of typing out your position.
I will ask you again. Where in the autopsy does it mention asphyxia?
And homicide doesn’t mean what you think it means. It means the killing of one person by another.
So then it is extremely clear that you believe Martin’s brain injuries (the severe global edema and the “moderate congestion of the leptomeninges” were caused by the single gunshot.
This is where I want other people to weigh in.
Is it possible that BOTH of these injuries were caused by a single gunshot?
Or is it more likely that BOTH of these injuries were NOT the result of a single gunshot?
Am I being more clear** Magiver**?
Based on my readings, I don’t believe both injuries were caused by the gunshot.
That’s why I gave you the cite, Magiver.
yet again, I ask you where you see asphyxia in the coroner’s report. It’s a simple question.
I don’t know how they were caused. I believe it’s possible that they could have been caused by the gunshot wound, for which we have some evidence, or asphyxiation, for which we have none, or for that matter they could have been pre-existing, for which we also have no evidence.
Why are you concluding that the thing for which we have no evidence occurred? Speculation is one thing, but moving from that speculation to certainty it happened that way with no additional evidence, to concluding Zimmerman’s guilt from that, is fucking ridiculous.
Please cite evidence that Martin was asphyxiated. Ideally the part in the autopsy report where he had injuries to the face or neck consistent with asphyxiation. Or, are you assuming that the coroner somehow missed them, but you have witness evidence of asphyxiation? If so, you should probably contact the prosecutors, as that witness hasn’t provided their evidence.
Or, just possibly, you’re making shit up. Again.
I am not going to allow you to put me on the defensive here.
Again, what could have caused both of those brain injuries?
You are SPECULATING the gunshot.
I am SPECULATING not.
Please read again what I said.
I am giving an alternate reasons why Martin had that specific brain injury.
It’s plausible and it would fit in with what could have happened that night.
The statement you wrote that I colored red is BS. I am not concluding the corner missed anything. The coroner DID NOT write that the gunshot wound caused that particular brain injury.
Also, positional asphyxia might not necessarily leave any marks.
So you’re full of it. You are reaching conclusions that I didn’t even imply.
You’ve repeatedly brought up asphyxia. There is no indication in the coroner’s report about asphyxia.
Explain this or there will be no further discussion with you until you do. You’re late to this thread and already you’ve come up with a judo throwing Zimmerman who randomly entered a house in order to conspire murder with another resident. You then theorized the coroner based his conclusion of homicide partly on fluid around the brain which shows you don’t know the meaning of the word “homicide”. It’s clear in his report that the Martin died of a gunshot wound. There are no extenuating circumstances listed.
So, this is it. No more throwing theories on the wall to see if they stick and then moving on. Defend your claim of asphyxia starting with the Coroner’s report.
-
This was to explain the brain congestion…Again, do you believe that the gunshot was responsible for all of the brain injuries?
-
I didn’t say all of that.
-
This is blatantly incorrect. I said he might have based it on a COMBINATION of factors: the edema and the congestion.
Again, what are the possibilities that he got the congestion from the gunshot?
- Again, from my research on “Moderate congestion of the leptomeninges”, I have gotten asphyxia as a cause (as well as meningitis). If potentially Zimmerman had Martin in a hold, that could be responsible for the injury.
I am really going to need a medical professional to explain this…but I think this is important.
Where in the coroner’s report does it mention asphyxia? Both me and Magiver have asked you this, and you’ve not replied.
Yes, I’m speculating that it was caused by the gunshot wound. I listed 3 possibilities, only one of which is supported by evidence, none of which is proven. Why are you claiming that one of the ones not supported by evidence is sufficient that you want to put Zimmerman in jail?
I’m not, however, speculating the gunshot. We know, provable to a certainty, that the gunshot happened. We do not know, and indeed have no reason whatsoever to think, that Martin was asphyxiated. The two things are not equal.
Indeed, the lack of any report of asphyxiation, or wounds that could lead to asphyxiation, in the coroners report, are evidence (not proof) that asphyxiation didn’t occur.
Once again, supply your evidence that it did - the evidence that you are building your speculation on. If you don’t have that evidence, it’s not even speculation regarding this case, it’s arrant nonsense.
Also, I am going to say this:
If you feel that the gunshot caused the brain injury, put YOUR evidence forward.
I am not going to continue being put on the defensive and accept your speculation while having my concerns and questions (which IMO are totally legit) being dismissed.
You don’t need a medical professional to explain that just because something could be caused by something doesn’t mean it is, you need a logician.
Why are you assuming asphyxiation and not meningitis? You have equal evidence for both - that is, none.
You don’t have to accept anyone else’s speculation, you have to defend your own. My evidence that Martin was shot is the coroner’s report, the police statement, the witness statements, Zimmerman’s statement that he shot him, and about a million other things.
What is your evidence Martin was asphyxiated?
I am also leaving this as an open question. I might actually make a different thread to see if a medical professional will respond.
Now, may I ask you what your case is for the brain injuries (both of them) to be caused by the single gunshot?
Again, my research has pointed to asphyxiation or meningitis as the reason for the congestion.
That’s why I am coming to my conclusions.
I’m not claiming they were caused by the gunshot wound, but that they could have been. Do you understand that a bullet wound to the heart and lungs would cause cerebral anoxia?
Why assume aspyxiation and not meningitis? You have the same amount of evidence for either, which is none, and far less than for the gunshot.
For that matter, you are claiming Zimmerman is guilty, so the burden of proof is on you.