Also, I didn’t catch this earlier, but what makes you think I believe the coroner is not a medical professional?
I asked someone to give me more information on the injuries and to confirm that they were both from the gunshot.
You’re going south.
You use the word “logical”, but again, the link was not established. I don’t know why you’re assuming they were and then taking me to task for not making that same assumption.
I asked a very simple question.
I know what the coroner’s job is…he saw signs of edema and congestion. He noted that. Again, he didn’t say that they were both the result of the gunshot. HE DID NOT. Again, why are you trying to force me to assume they were? Because it fits in with your narrative.
You and steophan are doing the same things that you accuse me of doing.
Again, I am asking a very basic question. It’s not unreasonable. I just wanted to know the exact link between those three injuries. Again, it could turn out that the congestion was not related to the gunshot wound. That could change the complexion of the case.
This is why I wanted someone with medical knowledge to weigh in.
I really don’t know why the two of you are trying to shut this discussion down.
The coroner said the gunshot caused his death. There are therefore three options - that the brain injuries were caused by the gunshot, that they did not contribute to his death, or the coroner is wrong. You seem to be asserting the third, without evidence, and asking for a medical professional, presumably not the coroner, to support you. For reasons you’ve not yet shared.
No.
Please stop with the strawman arguments and twisting what I am asserting.
I am asking for the relationship that the injuries have to one another.
I am asking POINT BLANK if the gunshot CAUSED THE OTHER TWO.
That’s my question.
We don’t have the evidence to say that with absolute certainty.
However I think the point of Magiver and Steophan’s argument is that there is some evidence of cause, the gunshot wound. From what I have read here and on the web, an expert witness could probably be brought in to testify that those brain injuries can be consistent with a gunshot wound to the heart and lungs.
On the other hand, while there are several other possible causes of the brain injuries, we don’t know of any evidence that indicates cause other than the gunshot wound.
Thus it makes establishing causes other than the gunshot beyond a reasonable doubt problematic.
Barring a rabbit out of the hat by the prosecution, I think the only one who can sink Zimmerman’s acquittal is Zimmerman. He seems to have a penchant for wanting to be helpful and explain things. With some luck he explains himself into a corner that is nigh impossible to get out of.
I hear you, but I am glad to see you understand the points and concerns I am bringing up.
For example, if say it was proven that the congestion was NOT caused by the gunshot, that will open up a can of worms for ZImmerman.
No stone should be unturned…What might seem insignificant could be crucial.
Martin deserves this.
Other causes not related to asphyxiation would need to be accounted for as well so that they could be ruled out. The prosecution bears the burden of proof. It falls on you to show evidence that your inferences are or could be provable. We lack direct evidence of Zimmerman choking Martin.
In your opinion what does the state need as evidence to show the gunshot is not a reasonable explanation for the brain injuries?
personally, both.
[/QUOTE]
Would you describe the mechanics of this to me?
I am having a hard time envisioning this in a way that satisfies what we know about the gunshot wound location and path while also satisfying the contact nature with regard to the clothing and intermediate distance with regard to the body.
How does it open up a can of worms? The coroner is clear that the gunshot killed Martin, not anything else. We have no evidence that Zimmerman asphyxiated Martin, or otherwise injured him, aside from the gunshot.
If it were proven that the brain injuries weren’t caused by the gunshot (although how that could be done, I’ve no idea, as a gunshot to the heart and lungs will inevitably cause cerebral anoxia), what do you imagine that tells us about ZImmerman’s actions?
I would think 2 collapsed lungs would account for asphyxiation.
Why would that open up a can of anything for Zimmerman?
What might seem crucial to you, might seem insignificant to the coroner. And the prosecutor.
Martin did NOT die from congestion. He might have if the blood loss hadn’t been so severe. Having an excessive or abnormal accumulation of blood or other fluid in the lungs would be considered a normal result of having both lungs and the heart punchered.
There were no other wounds or injuries discovered by the coroner that would provide another possible explaination for the congestion.
This is rather old news, but Martin’s nail beds had turned blue, which would mean all the oxygen in his body had been consumed. If he had died instantly, due to being choked, there wouldn’t have been time for his body to have consumed all his oxygen. Basically, the right part of his heart supplied blood to his lungs, which are than aerated by the lungs, before being circulated throughout his body. Since that part of his heart was blown away, this could no longer occur,and Martin had to survive with what was left in his leaking bloodstream. He certainly didn’t die immediately after being shot. Maybe he could have run all the way home before collapsing and dying, if Zimmerman hadn’t tackled him. Three witnesses claim the altercation started at the top of the T, then moved south. Why Martin was at the top of the T, the same place where Zimmerman was a couple of minutes earlier might lead some to conclude that Martin returned to the T.
Interesting take…not gonna with you like others, but an interesting take nonetheless.
Or maybe Martin hid from Zimmerman and possibly Zimmerman came after him.
That’s a possibility too ;).
I was thinking…how can Zimmerman still have a valid self-defense claim if he admitted that he wasn’t afraid of Martin and Martin was “skipping away” as he said?
Food for thought hmarvin.
But anyway, time for the chorus to chime in.
Yeah, might.
So might the things that some of the Zimmerman groupies say too.
It’s not like I am bringing up something outlandish: I am asking a simple question–SIMPLE: what is the relationship of those three injuries?
Nothing “wild”, nothing crazy, just a simple f’ing question.
Yet, I get the typical responses from the Zimmerman chorus trying to shut any line of thought that diverges from them.
Well to start with, Zimmerman doesn’t have any groupies in this thread. Nobody who you see as supporting Zimmerman gives a rat’s ass if he goes down in flames based on new information. We don’t have an emotional interest in this trial. This is in direct contrast to you who has ended a post with the pronouncement: “That guy MUST be locked up.” You clearly think he’s guilty and continue looking for support for this premise.
The response is the simple logic regarding the Coroner’s report which showed no signs of Zimmerman strangling Martin. There are no signs. There are no witnesses. There’s no evidence of trauma on Martin’s body that this happened. Yet you keep talking about a lack of oxygen and ignoring a gunshot to the heart (the pump that moves it) and the 2 collapsed lungs which infuse it into the blood. Then you ignore the evidence of THAT which is the blue fingernails.
You’re hypothesizing that Zimmerman strangled Martin and then shot his corpse or unconscious body all the while yelling for help. You then ignore the evidence that shows that Martin attacked Zimmerman.
How is this food for thought? There is no claim that Zimmerman had a valid self-defense claim when Martin was “skipping away”. Martin hadn’t attacked him yet and therefore there wasn’t a reason to defend himself at that point.
con·ges·tion (kn-jschn) n.
The presence of an abnormal amount of fluid in a vessel or organ; especially excessive accumulation of blood, due either to increased afflux or to obstruction of return flow.
suffocation [suf″ŏ-ka´shun]
the stoppage of breathing; called also asphyxiation. If it is complete (no air at all reaches the lungs), the lack of oxygen and excess of carbon dioxide in the blood will cause almost immediate loss of consciousness. Though the heart continues to beat briefly, death will follow in a matter of minutes unless emergency measures are taken to get breathing started again.
Even a coroner would know that a heart with a hole in it will no longer pump oxygen rich blood. Lungs that have punctures in them will collapse and no longer be able to transfer oxygen into the blood stream. The lack oxygen would be recorded as asphyxiation and the blood pooling in the punctured lungs would be recorded as congestion. The coroner listed the cause of death. Unless you know of some injuries that the coroner missed or did not record, Martin’s asphyxiation and congestion were a result of the gunshot wound.
Because he didn’t use any force on Martin at that point, to defend himself or otherwise. He used force later, after Martin had attacked him, despite your claim that Martin was moving away from Zimmerman…
If, as you suggest, Zimmerman had shot Martin as he was skipping away, he would probably be guilty of murder. As there’s no evidence that he did, and strong evidence that he shot him whilst Martin was in the process of brutally attacking him, it’s kinda irrelevant.
If you choose to respond to this post, please answer this simple question - Why does the fact that Zimmerman wasn’t in fear before Martin began attacking him have any bearing on whether he was in fear whilst Martin was attacking him?
Wonderful reasoning.:dubious:
Reread that argument, and maybe you can see the flaws.
You might very well be correct, but not from the argument that you and some other posters are offering.
Because IMO Martin “attacked” Zimmerman in self-defense.
I was looking at some Florida self-defense jury instructions.
I read that the jury can take into account the physical abilities and capacities of the victim and defendant.
I don’t see how this favors Zimmerman, considering he was a former bouncer, had a 50 pound weight advantage and had a gun on his person at the time.
More food for thought…
But then again Travyon was a “No limit nigg*” and possessed superhuman speed and strength.
Also, was reaching for his gun the first thing Zimmerman wanted to do when he supposedly was being beaten (rather then getting Martin off him or even punching him back)?
My instinct is to fight back with my hands.