That’s not even the worst of his statements. I distinctly remember reading him say Zimmerman had acted in self-defense. And folks want to cry about pro-Martin bias. Yeah, okay.
How about if he were lying on the ground shot, and the guy who shot him had a broken nose and black eyes and said he punched him?
Yes, I know that.
Zimmerman’s narrative is that [list=A][li]Martin punched him in the face and broke his nose and blackened his eyes. I believe this, because it is backed up by the evidence. And []That Martin punched him other times as well. I don’t believe this, because it is not backed up by the evidence. And []I don’t see what difference it makes. Martin punched him in the face, knocked him down, jumped on top of him, and bashed his head on the ground. Zimmerman, either accidentally or deliberately, miscounted the number of times Martin punched him. OK - so what? [/list] Whether Martin punched him once or a dozen times, it was enough to break Zimmerman’s nose, blacken his eyes, and knock him down so that Martin could jump on top of him and begin bashing his head on the ground.[/li]
I agree. It is consistent with dealing one blow to a human nose sufficient to break it and blacken the eyes. So that’s what I believe happened.
Regards,
Shodan
He was driving up the street. The house is in his view the whole time.
He knows the owner of the house. According to his account Martin was in the yard looking around. This was a house that was previously broken into.
I’ve listened to it many times. It’s quite evident he reacts to the request.
If Martin was just passing through then he would have kept walking. And yes, Zimmerman never mentions the cut-through. He said Martin was walking in the front lawn looking at the house. Now maybe Martin had a perfectly good reason to stand out in the rain with his candy and drink and look at the houses instead of running home where it’s dry. Maybe he’s planning on becoming an architect or likes the landscaping and plans on showing his Dad the next day. Whatever the reason, he looked suspicious.
The back of his head is covered with injuries consistent with his account.
From what I’ve seen of Martin I wouldn’t be surprised if he was just waiting for a white head to bash into the cement. I just mirrored your statement to show you how stupid it sounds even though there is evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman and no evidence that Frank did what you imagined.
I was responding to the assertion quoted above.
Imho, the peculiar distribution of injuries doesn’t add any credibility to Z’s claim that he shot M because M was reaching for Z’s gun. obviously, for many, the mileage varies.
Maybe. If we take Z’s word for it. AFAICT, Z’s attempting to deceive. So I don’t see whereas his statements have any credibility even inside the radius equal to distance which I could fling him.
For all I know, Z slipped on the wet grass.
I don’t think that a small scrape on a finger is particularly indicative of punching someone.
But, technically, breathing is consistent with having punched someone. I know a guy who punched someone, and he breathed. I have a scrape on my finger of the same approximate area, but I didn’t punch anyone to get it.
Which would mean that TM could also clearly see Z’s vehicle approaching. Had he really been up to mischief, that would have been the time for him to haul ass, and the fact that he didn’t should have been a big clue to Z that TM wasn’t walking around with criminal intent.
There is no “yard,” and as far as I’m aware, Taafe’s house hadn’t actually been burgled, Z had just scared away what he believed was a suspicious character. If you have information contrary to my belief I’ll be happy to incorporate it into my knowledge base.
And I’ve listened to it many times and beg to differ.
You only have Z’s word that he was doing any of those things. Z’s hardly likely to phone for help and then tell them his “suspect” was doing nothing particularly noticeable to have attracted his attention.
Mere scratches. Is the defence going to rely on claiming Z has a bump-proof head that was highly resistant to a savage onslaught by a crazed teen?
To mirror my comment you’d have needed to pick one of Trayvon’s friends to try and discredit.
Why should it have been a big clue? It’s not normal to stand out in the rain at night at someone else’s home. It’s suspicious activity and it doesn’t matter if you don’t think so. Zimmerman did the prudent thing and called police. We have an account of that as evidence.
The person who owns the house made the statement that it had been burglarized. The prosecution cannot entertain some internet psychic’s bigoted opinion.
There is no dispute that the breathing changed soon after he agreed to stop. It’s measured in seconds.
That’s correct. We have Z’s rolling commentary as evidence.
The defense is going to rely on the photographic, eye witness, and medical evidence of a fight.
To mirror my comment you’d have needed to pick one of Trayvon’s friends to try and discredit.
[/QUOTE]
Nice try but no, the analogy involved a bigoted observation based on appearance. Who I used is irrelevant.
There’s a motion just filed. EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER/PROPHYLACTIC SUPPRESSION OF WITNESSES PRIOR TO DEFENSE DEPOSITION.
The significance of this is that state never informed the defense, in discovery, that most of the investigators on the case didn’t find sufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman, and Omara wants the investigators statements immediately. There’s also apparently a witness with exculpatory information that the defense was never informed of by the prosecutors.
You wrote this with the intent of driving me into a fit of frothing rage, didn’t you?
Okay. I didn’t remember that being referenced by any of the witnesses. It’s still only one shooting, not shootings as was said in the post I was responding to.
That’s been stated in at least one article, but I think there Frank Taaffe’s words may have been mistated. I have seen more sources that have Taaffe saying that Zimmerman scared off a black man near Taaffe’s home, and Taaffe believed this to be a thwarted burglary.
Either Martin was on top of Zimmerman causing the injuries or he wasn’t. All the evidence indicates he was. Your frothing fit of rage is an indication that you can’t look at information rationally without your emotions taking over.
Most people know if they left a window and a door open.
I can’t look at one more person (or the same person over and over again) conflating a scratched finger with injured knuckles without my emotions taking over, no. Because the injured knuckles trope here just ain’t true.
Not sure what your point is here. People were arguing whether or not Traaffe’s home had been burglarized. Well, if nothing was taken, no burglary occurred.
Are you’re saying the fight didn’t occur or that Martin didn’t punch Zimmerman? Because the cut on his hand corresponds to the area where it would be expected and Zimmerman shows sign’s of being struck.
Which was attributed to Zimmerman’s actions.
I am saying here that Martin did not have injured knuckles, and that Taaffe’s home was not burglarized. These are simple statements of fact.
the Coroner disagrees with you and the burglary was stopped by Zimmerman according to the property owner.
How exactly does the coroner disagree with me?
he lists the mark on his hand and indicated it’s location on a diagram. It’s in the leading edge of a hand formed into a fist.
It is one scratch which is not on a knuckle. Why then, not call it a scratched finger? I suppose because injuries knuckles sound very much more ominous and thuglike.
Call it whatever you like. It’s the frontal area of contact formed by making a fist. It is the area of contact when striking someone.
again, are you claiming Martin didn’t hit Zimmerman?
Well, how about instead of calling things what we like, we call them what they are? I think it would make debate far more productive.
So, you’d be happy with calling it a hand injury consistent with having punched someone?
I accurately described it as it relates to the case. It’s the frontal area of contact formed by making a fist. It is the area of contact when striking someone.
debate would be more productive if you were able to respond to simple questions and debate them.
Are you claiming Martin didn’t strike Zimmerman?