Forensic expert: Trayvon Martin shot leaning over George Zimmerman

I am going to go make penne with vodka sauce now. Howey I appoint you my representative. you said you wanted the job, so now I am charging you with arguing my position for me. Have fun.
 
christiefan915 said:
I haven't followed it as closely as you but I thought the only blood on GZ belonged to GZ.
Click to expand...

You know it was raining....wet grass, wet ground, wet clothes.....

You think its unrealistic take Martin didn't have blood not him...or impossible....?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Conversely some people believe that provoking a confrontation that costs someone their life, even if there was no fore thought or malice by the person doing the killing is still a crime, if not murder.

Self defense is not a reasonable defense for manslaughter Grind. It is for murder but not manslaughter.

From what I've seen so far, and based on the facts, the prosecution has a fairly strong case for a manslaughter conviction and pretty weak case for murder and if they persue a manslaughter conviction. I'd also say that at this time they could make a good argument for voluntary manslaughter and they have an excellent case for involuntary manslaughter.
Click to expand...

Those people may think that, but they would be wrong as far as the law is concerned. Let's face it. There could be video and audio evidence of Trayvon beating Zimmerman screaming "die spic" and lefties would still say "so what".
 
Pete Campbell said:
that part might be true, especially because he was the only one really attacked in the situation.
Click to expand...

What is the possibility of TM's blood spatter on GZ, if GZ shot him at close range? The specialist testified: "You are losing 1,500 cc's {cubic centimeters) in a minute. That's about a quarter of his blood supply. In a second minute, if you can assume the same rate. Actually the heart would probably be beating faster for the second minute. He is going to lose another 1,500. Well that means he has lost more than 50%of his blood supply."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/09/justice/zimmerman-trial/index.html
 
NOVA said:
You know it was raining....wet grass, wet ground, wet clothes.....

You think its unrealistic take Martin didn't have blood not him...or impossible....?
Click to expand...

Unrealistic if he really was shot at close range. The forensic guy said he could have lost half his blood supply in the first two minutes.
 
Rana said:
Insignificant injuries

He did nt get the shit beat out of him.

Grind, when and how did he cock the gun? Did he already have it cocked when he pursued Trayvon?

I don't know about hand guns, I don't know how he would be able to cock the gun while Trayvon was on top of him doing all the things he claimed Trayvon was doing.

I haven't seen a reenactment of the struggle.
Click to expand...
A well placed punch can kill.
 
Pete Campbell said:
you guys need to basically just deny a shit load of evidence to even come close to believing team travyvons side of the story. Everything zimmerman has said is consistent and matches up with expert testimony. There is not a single thing in the past 3 weeks involving the altercation that has been definitively disproven. Not one thing.
Click to expand...

You find that bush?
 
christiefan915 said:
Unrealistic if he really was shot at close range. The forensic guy said he could have lost half his blood supply in the first two minutes.
Click to expand...

Could have....the operative word being could....
There are many things that 'could have' happened, thats why we rely on the physical evidence to a great degree......
Most of TM's bleeding would have been internal....

Also, evidence proves he was shot at close range....no greater than 4 in, so there is no IF.
 
Last edited:
christiefan915 said:
What is the possibility of TM's blood spatter on GZ, if GZ shot him at close range? The specialist testified: "You are losing 1,500 cc's {cubic centimeters) in a minute. That's about a quarter of his blood supply. In a second minute, if you can assume the same rate. Actually the heart would probably be beating faster for the second minute. He is going to lose another 1,500. Well that means he has lost more than 50%of his blood supply."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/09/justice/zimmerman-trial/index.html
Click to expand...
Ever seen a bleed out?
Blood leaves the circulatory system and enters other body cavities.

I saw an executed Pashtun, shot a dozen+ times by his tribe bled out in a few mins.
No blood on the body, no splatter. The guy had 5 shots to the face, jaw shattered, eye sockets, nose, barely recognizable!!
No blood visable anywhere.
Your body is a big bag that holds blood.
Sometimes they call it internal bleeding.
 
Last edited:
Pete Campbell said:
According to the States witness, but the ME testified today that just because you don't see outward injuries, internally you can still have a "stunning" effect and feel immense pain. To claim self defense, it's about the reasonable fear of death or grave bodily injury. The world renowned ME testified to that today that you can have injuries that may not look bad but could present a great risk, and injuries that look awful but are meaningless.

Listen to the States witness carter (i think that's his name). He said it wouldn't be advisable to wait until you are dead before defending yourself. I agree.



The world renowned ME today disagreed, he said it's very reasonable and likely that someone in that position could have internal injuries and stunning in the brain.



I dont know how guns work so I can't really answer this. If it needed to be cocked I doubt it takes very long. Maybe I am mistaken.
Click to expand...

The one police woman, I believe she was police, demonstrated you needed both hands to load a bullet into the chamber of Zimmerman's gun. I guess this is a question for Billy.

There is no evidence that Trayvon threw the first punch, only Zimmerman's testimnony and I believe they do not considered tat it a fact.

Zimmerman did not go to the hospital, did not have a concussion.

Do you think anyone in a fist fight and hta few times will now have the right to shoot another and claim self defense?
 
NOVA said:
Could have....the operative word being could....
There are many things that 'could have' happened, thats why we rely on the physical evidence to a great degree......
Most of TM's bleeding would have been internal....
Click to expand...

Actually the expert didn't say "could have".

"You are losing 1,500 cc's {cubic centimeters) in a minute. That's about a quarter of his blood supply. In a second minute, if you can assume the same rate. Actually the heart would probably be beating faster for the second minute. He is going to lose another 1,500. Well that means he has lost more than 50% of his blood supply."

And pictures of TM's blood-soaked clothing were already introduced into evidence.
 
Pete Campbell said:
According to the States witness, but the ME testified today that just because you don't see outward injuries, internally you can still have a "stunning" effect and feel immense pain. To claim self defense, it's about the reasonable fear of death or grave bodily injury. The world renowned ME testified to that today that you can have injuries that may not look bad but could present a great risk, and injuries that look awful but are meaningless.

Listen to the States witness carter (i think that's his name). He said it wouldn't be advisable to wait until you are dead before defending yourself. I agree.



The world renowned ME today disagreed, he said it's very reasonable and likely that someone in that position could have internal injuries and stunning in the brain.



I dont know how guns work so I can't really answer this. If it needed to be cocked I doubt it takes very long. Maybe I am mistaken.
Click to expand...

World renowned but jury didn't believe him in the Spector case.
 
Rana said:
No, it still doesn't justify the shooting.
Click to expand...
I agree but I think the evidence is pretty clear that he's not guilty of murder as the prosecution hasn't really established premeditation or deliberation on Zimmermans part.

How ever it isn't a stretch at all to argue that Zimmerman did improperly use reasonable care or skill.

In other words cause this nimrod was a moron with a gun (and that's not meant as a cheap shot at gun owners.) and an authority complex and behaved like the complete amatuer dipshit that he is and a young man died.

Let me explain it to you in a formula you can dig;

Zimmerman = moron
Moron + gun = bad idea
Moron + gun + wanna be cop syndrome = dead niger

Yea...I aint got a problem holding a moron like Zimmerman to account for being stupid. His stupidity cost someone their life. This is less about race and nothing to do with gun laws. It's about some moron (Zimmerman) doing something stupid that got someone killed (Trayvon).

I wouldn't rule out an involuntary manslaughter conviction.
 
Last edited:
Pete Campbell said:
you guys need to basically just deny a shit load of evidence to even come close to believing team travyvons side of the story. Everything zimmerman has said is consistent and matches up with expert testimony. There is not a single thing in the past 3 weeks involving the altercation that has been definitively disproven. Not one thing.
Click to expand...

No blood on Trayvon's hands, how did he cover Zimmermans face with his hands and not get any blood on his hands. You said the evidence supports Zimmermans story but you are leaving a few details out.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I agree but I think the evidence is pretty clear that he's not guilty of murder as the prosecution hasn't really established premeditation or deliberation on Zimmermans part.

How ever it isn't a stretch at all to argue that Zimmerman did improperly use reasonable care or skill.

In other words cause this nimrod was a moron with a gun (and that's not meant as a cheap shot at gun owners.) and an authority complex and behaved like the complete amatuer dipshit that he is and a young man died.

Let me explain it to you in a formula you can dig;

Zimmerman = moron
Moron + gun = bad idea
Moron + gun + wanna be cop syndrome = dead niger

Yea...I aint got a problem holding a moron like Zimmerman to account for being stupid. His stupidity cost someone their life. This is less about race and nothing to do with gun laws. It's about some moron (Zimmerman) doing something stupid that got someone killed (Trayvon).

I wouldn't rule out an involuntary manslaughter conviction.
Click to expand...

I agree, I thought after the first week that this set of prosecuters wouldn't get second degree and their lack of going for the jugular cross examination, they may have blown the case.
 
Rana said:
The one police woman, I believe she was police, demonstrated you needed both hands to load a bullet into the chamber of Zimmerman's gun. I guess this is a question for Billy.

There is no evidence that Trayvon threw the first punch, only Zimmerman's testimnony and I believe they do not considered tat it a fact.

Zimmerman did not go to the hospital, did not have a concussion.

Do you think anyone in a fist fight and hta few times will now have the right to shoot another and claim self defense?
Click to expand...
A well placed punch can kill
 
Oh yea.....and the main reason I think he'll get involuntary manslaughter is that he's too fucking stupid to achieve voluntary manslaughter. Just his luck....the moron.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top