Posted on 05/20/2012 3:03:51 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
We have not yet commented on the release of evidence yesterday by the special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case. The evidence is highly illuminating, although it leaves at least one critical question unanswered. But, contrary to most press reports, the overall impact of the new evidence is to indicate that George Zimmerman has a strong claim of self-defense.
Zimmerman says that Martin attacked him, knocked him down and was beating on him and banging his head into the ground. Fearful for his life, Zimmerman pulled his 9 mm pistol and shot Martin. The key piece of evidence that has now been made public is this statement from an eyewitness, which corroborates Zimmerman’s account:
This witness, who was observing from a mere ten yards away, couldn’t be any clearer: Trayvon Martin was straddling Zimmerman and beating on him “mixed martial arts style.” Zimmerman was yelling for help. Finally, Zimmerman pulled his gun and shot Martin. Unless there is some reason to doubt the credibility of this witness–and it is hard to see what reason there would be, since he is simply a neighbor under whose windows the fight broke out–it looks like a classic case of self-defense. This witness’s account also appears to confirm that the “stand your ground” defense does not apply. You can’t retreat when you are lying on the ground with an assailant beating on your head.
Press coverage of the released documents has been absurdly bad. The Associated Press headlines, Evidence mixed for Zimmerman’s self-defense claim. But the AP cites no evidence that undermines Zimmerman’s story, and fails even to mention the critical statement reproduced above. This is sheer journalistic malpractice.
The AP, like many other media outlets, tries to suggest that the altercation was Zimmerman’s fault–and therefore, apparently, he should be convicted of murder–because he shouldn’t have gotten out of his car:
But the original lead detective in the case believed Zimmerman caused the fight by getting out of his vehicle to confront Martin, who wasn’t doing anything criminal, and then could have defused the situation by telling Martin he was just a concerned citizen and tried to talk to him.
But Zimmerman had an absolute right to get out of his car. He had a right to approach Martin and talk to him. He had a right to ask Martin what he was doing in the neighborhood. The question is not whether he “confronted” Martin, the question is whether he assaulted him. If Zimmerman merely confronted Martin, and Martin slugged Zimmerman, then Martin committed a crime, not Zimmerman. Nothing in news reports on the released documents suggests that there is any evidence as to who actually started the fight–other than Zimmerman’s testimony, of course. Further, as I noted here, Zimmerman could have a valid claim of self-defense under Florida law even if he threw the first punch–of which, as far as we now know, there is zero evidence.
The AP mingles relevant with irrelevant questions:
Still, many of the pertinent questions remain unclear: What was in Zimmerman’s mind when he began to follow Martin in the gated community where he lived? [Ed.: Irrelevant.] How did the confrontation between the two begin? [Ed.: Highly relevant.] Whose screams for help were captured on 911 calls? [Ed.: Relevant, but the AP fails to note that an eyewitness says it was Zimmerman who called for help.] And why did Zimmerman feel that deadly force was warranted? [Ed.: Relevant. Zimmerman's self-defense claim requires that he reasonably believed that he was in danger of death or great bodily harm.] Did the fact that Martin was black play a role in Zimmerman’s actions? [Ed.: Irrelevant.]
The Washington Post’s account of the new evidence commits essentially the same errors as the AP’s story:
It is unclear how the new documents might bolster or undermine the state’s case against Zimmerman, who has a Peruvian mother and a white father.
Actually, the documents that have been disseminated publicly plainly reinforce Zimmerman’s defense. But a reader of the Post wouldn’t know that, since that paper, like the AP, fails to disclose the eyewitness testimony recorded above. And the usual bias creeps in:
The documents include information that points to what some have characterized as a sloppy and incomplete police investigation, which initially resulted in no charges being filed. That sparked rallies across the county calling for Zimmerman’s arrest.
As though it were tautological that a thorough investigation would have resulted in Zimmerman’s arrest!
What is going on here, I suspect, is that the newspapers are trying to extricate themselves from the Zimmerman-is-guilty narrative gradually. Rather than admitting all at once that they were had, they will walk back what they have previously written over a period of time, so that by the time Zimmerman is acquitted, or the charges against him are dismissed, they can pretend that they knew it all along. That is how it looks like the case is going based on what we now know, in any event.
Well, DUH!! Anyone who’d been reading FR posts knew all along that this is what hapened.
What’s “mixed martial arts style.”? Just curious.
This is pure racist bunk. The President of the USA has already claimed the the young child Trayvon Martin innocent. The four year old Martin was begging for food and was shot then eaten by the racist nazi Zimmerman. So says the media!
Bad? It did exactly what it was supposed to do, which was incite a race war, including individuals and couples being beaten for being "white," generate calls for suspension of the Second Amendment, and on and on and on.
It's like a wrong answer buzzer that shreds the AP and MSM smokescreen crap at the period.
Indeed.
The one piece of evidence that is really telling has not been mentioned. Zimmerman fired his gun at less than 18” from Martin. But what was the angle of the bullet through Martin’s clothing and body?
This is such a standard bit of forensics that it is often shown on crime drama TV shows, and with dowels in mannequins in courtrooms.
“Martin was straddling Zimmerman’s chest while punching him MMA style.” Then Martin saw Zimmerman’s gun in his waistband and they both went for it. Zimmerman got the gun and fired.
That has got to produce a very distinct and unusual bullet path that would be very hard to reproduce otherwise.
My guess is that the bullet entered below Martin’s sternum and came out his back between his shoulder blades or even higher. Extremely hard to reproduce in any other scenario.
It's American for "soixante neuf".
That’s news to me, I didn’t know Zimmerman ate Trayvon, that amounts to treating him like a dog!
And the evil media WAITED FOR ZIMMERMAN’S WOUNDS TO HEAL before sensationalizing this story.
Ye Olde Ground and Pound.
The bullet did not exit the body. Went through the heart...Makes me wonder it the angle was from waist up to shoulder....traveling length of trunk of body instead of through the body.
Any way to find out if TM has training in the Martial Arts. Know a young man convicted of manslaughter because of that training...his hands were considered a weapon.
The coroners report did not show an exit wound. Considering the bullet path is likely to be in the range of 12 to 16 inches, I would expect to see an upward trajectory or a highly fragmented bullet.
But bullet angles can do all kinds of crazy things. Esp if it hits a bone / rib.
The AP, like many other media outlets, tries to suggest that the altercation was Zimmerman’s fault–and therefore, apparently, he should be convicted of murder–because he shouldn’t have gotten out of his car:The only question this prosecution seems to raise is precisely whether Zimmerman had rights which those who look like they could be the president’s son are obligated to respect.But the original lead detective in the case believed Zimmerman caused the fight by getting out of his vehicle to confront Martin, who wasn’t doing anything criminal, and then could have defused the situation by telling Martin he was just a concerned citizen and tried to talk to him.But Zimmerman had an absolute right to get out of his car. He had a right to approach Martin and talk to him. He had a right to ask Martin what he was doing in the neighborhood. The question is not whether he “confronted” Martin, the question is whether he assaulted him. If Zimmerman merely confronted Martin, and Martin slugged Zimmerman, then Martin committed a crime, not Zimmerman. Nothing in news reports on the released documents suggests that there is any evidence as to who actually started the fight–other than Zimmerman’s testimony, of course. Further, as I noted here, Zimmerman could have a valid claim of self-defense under Florida law even if he threw the first punch–of which, as far as we now know, there is zero evidence.
From the autopsy report, it read like the bullet wound was straight through front to back. Zimmerman’s shot went through Martin left of the sternum and either hit or nicked the heart and somehow collapsed the lungs.
When Martin was “Trayvoned,” he died a quick death. It was a good hit which was important because the KelTec didn’t chamber another round.
This is the mount position where the man on top is sitting on the other man's torso having passed any guard he can put up with his legs thus assuming a very advantageous position.
The other image is more of a loose side control that is not firmly locked down by the upper man.
My guess is that the bullet entered below Martin’s sternum and came out his back between his shoulder blades or even higher.
************************
Autopsy report indicated bullet was straight into heart and did not exit the body.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.