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.
This case should not even made it out of the Grand Jury.
It NEVER went to a grand jury!!
“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.”
With a little practice, it is not too difficult to roll the top guy off and be on top of him, wailing on him.
That’s a sweep^^
Just a simple buck of the hips when the opponent has leaned slightly too far forward, then hold his neck down to your head at an angle, a quick reposition of your legs then a roll, and it is you on top.
But, just based on his looks and demeanor, I don’t think Zimmerman is familiar with such techniques.
Even without sweeping, the lower man could grab and crush testicles or even insert both thumbs into the eye sockets...or just shoot the guy in the heart.
Forensic analysis of Martin's outerwear has the shot a contact shot, short distance between the muzzle of the gun an the clothing. That is, as you say, less than 18 inches, but I would say that it is at least 15 inches less than 18 inches.
The path of the bullet was straight front-to-back. There is no exit wound, the bullet and a couple bullet fragments were removed from Martin's body.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/trayvon.martin.autopsy.pdf?hpt=hp_t2
>> “This case should not even made it out of the Grand Jury.” <<
.
The case was not going to make it out of the GJ, so they were dismissed.
Which is a good indication of some type of constraint on the slide action of the pistol, such as two sets of hands vying for control of the weapon.
Which is a good indication of some type of constraint on the slide action of the pistol, such as two sets of hands vying for control of the weapon.
There are still some details unclear--it is remarkable how much is documented compared to most incidents which end up with someone dead. I mean, most cold blooded killers don't call the cops beforehand.
I wonder how much time elapsed between when Zimmerman told the dispatcher "OK" and when Martin confronted him. Could he have gotten back to his vehicle during that interval or was he standing around expecting the cops to show up (and not expecting Martin to pop up out of nowhere)?
Zimmerman did not realize he did not have a legal right to get out of his car. Most of us would have been equally ignorant.
It is what the entertainment world has sunk too. Basically two martial artist in a street type of brawl which usually ends up with one man straddling the other and pummeling him bloody until the ref stops it.
I’ve wondered about that since it was reported. Where was the spent cartridge? I’m thinking it must have still been in the chamber.
Amazing!
I note the words “ring abrasion” at the site of entrance wound. Wouldn’t that indicate a direct contact, heavy pressure, with gun at time of firing?
Also noted the lead core of bullet and two jacket fragments internally.
Sounds like a very thorough autopsy.
Thanks, for your posting of that data.
This picture (on post #19 by chris37) is a very instructive illustration of how difficult it would have been for Zimmerman to get at and draw his Keltec from its in-the-pant waistband holster clipped to his belt. (His holster had two attachment features. One was a sewn loop on the right inside to pass the belt through. The other was a metal clip on the right outside to pass over the waistband and secure to the belt when the holster is inserted inside the pant. IIRC there was no top retainer loop closure to be unfastened in this model.)
It is also very likely that in this position Martin would likely have come to realize that the hard metal object touching his left leg was a firearm, although it might have been buffered by Z's coat. What happened next is inscrutable except if Zimmerman can remember if they struggled over the gun.
But the whole purpose in the typical regulations for carry is that a concealed deadly weapon be truly concealed, and not "printing" itself on the covering clothing such that a casual observer can discern its presence. If carried thus legally, Trayvon would not have noticed at first that George was carrying and a very dangerous person to threaten or tangle with -- what a fool!
George's foolishness was (and this is serious), after losing track of Trayvon's location, not carefully watching all around himself and thus presenting his adversary an opportunity to approach too closely without a warning. A CCDW places the burden on the carrier to be always aware, and to issue a warning, at least morally and procedurally: "Keep your distance!" and if not, draw -- if his advance continues the burden shifts to the potential adversary.
Allowing your awareness to drift would be like running down a pedestrian while driving and texting -- you would be negligent. Alas, in this George was negligent in his responsibility. Sorry. He was a part of the problem. This was a combat situation. He was surprised, and should not have been.
Ms. Corey may well make use of this in her prosecution. Has nobody else seen this? (I'm sure that by now George has.)
If I were on recon patrol, I sure would not want my enemy to sneak up on me, and so would make this my first priority. Let this be a lesson to all of us who carry, to always be aware of our responsibility to avoid negligence. Just as in driving a 2-ton behemoth at 60 mph -- no road condition or object entering our path without accounting and adjusting for it.
If either of them had not been a fool, this would not likely have happened. Trayvon lost big, and his parents need to admit and swallow his fault.
Excellent photo post!
Good article - thanks
My post indicated a distance of at least 15" closer than 18", which would be a distance of 3". It also noted that the muzzle of the pistol was in contact or nearly in contact with Martin's outerwear, an observation that is not made by the coroner, but is made in the forensic report following examination of Martin's clothing.
No. Ring abrasion is an indicator of the direction of entry (straight on, perpendicular to the skin surface). Abrasion is produced by the bullet, and will appear on a long range shot too.
Zimmerman did not realize he did not have a legal right to get out of his car. Most of us would have been equally ignorant.He didn't have a legal right to get out of his car?
I guess I still am ignorant, because I don't get that.
Where DO you have a legal right to get out of your car? Only in your own driveway? (What if you don't have a driveway?)
Please elaborate.
Thanks.
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.