The Trayvon Martin case -- DC discussion thread

[Druidx]

that which I did not know could have bigger implication than the funeral business.

Here is a review concerning the differecne between the Crump tapes and the ABC tape.
http://www.talkleft.com/zimm/abccrumpwitness8.pdf

Page 6 discusses how she changed GZ from saying "What are you talking about" to
"What are you doing around here". After Crump promted her to tell it like she did earlier.

 

[OCNewbie]

Yeah there could be many ways or reasons he does say it. But the fact is he does in fact say he thinks his non working flashlight was in his hand, he says he doesn't know which hand so he could have said the same response to the previous question but doesn't.

Actually he doesn't say he thinks the non-working flashlight was in his hand, but it does appear that way from the context of his response to Serino's next question.

Serino:"...At the time of the encounter with him, was there anything in your hand?
Zimmerman: I think my flashlight.

(which flashlight? he had two)

Serino: OK. The flashlight. Was it working or was it not working?
Zimmerman: It was dead.

(At this point, Serino had already called him out, 2 days prior, about GZ's earlier claim that his flashlight had been dead (and again, which flashlight?) (Link 2:45 Recording #3), so GZ may have thought Serino was referring to that again. I will repeat what I said earlier: If GZ's memory of those moments are reliable, then why doesn't he take this perfect opportunity to talk about the flashlight he had that was working? I think this shows that GZ's memory of that specific moment, that was only offered because of a specific question Serino asked him (which GZ's words in his response show he's not certain), and not GZ retelling events as he remembered them, implies that GZ's apparent recollection of that moment in particular should be taken with a grain of salt)

Which leads me to think anyway he had his bigger non working flashlight in his hand when it started (The one found some distance away from the T), we know he has the small one because its found near the T around 6 feet from what I have read.

We also know when this starts he says he goes for his phone.

We don't know he had the small one, but it does appear to be the case (how else did it get there?). It doesn't make sense that GZ had the bigger non-working flashlight in his hand at the T, because it doesn't make sense that he would have held onto it for all that length of time, after he was punched in the face, presumably the blow that also broke his nose.

Yes, we do know he says he goes for his phone, but he also says it wasn't in the pocket he expected it to be in... perhaps because his large, non-working flashlight was in that pocket?

 

[OCNewbie]

The thing is, her initial statement to the police is inadmissible hearsay. Her only influence on the case will come if and when the state calls her as a witness. If they do, she can be impeached about inconsistencies in her story or her admitted falsehoods. The circumstances under which her initial statement was made are not of vital importance because she will be forced to defend whatever version of events she provides at trial, under cross examination.

Since this thread has apparently gotten your attention, I have another question for you, if you don't mind. GZ's medical report... is that admissible as evidence (to support the diagnosis of GZ's injuries) without the Physician's Assistant who filled it out present?

 

[lotus503]

Actually he doesn't say he thinks the non-working flashlight was in his hand, but it does appear that way from the context of his response to Serino's next question.

Serino:"...At the time of the encounter with him, was there anything in your hand?
Zimmerman: I think my flashlight.

(which flashlight? he had two)

Serino: OK. The flashlight. Was it working or was it not working?
Zimmerman: It was dead.

(At this point, Serino had already called him out, 2 days prior, about GZ's earlier claim that his flashlight had been dead (and again, which flashlight?) (Link 2:45 Recording #3), so GZ may have thought Serino was referring to that again. I will repeat what I said earlier: If GZ's memory of those moments are reliable, then why doesn't he take this perfect opportunity to talk about the flashlight he had that was working? I think this shows that GZ's memory of that specific moment, that was only offered because of a specific question Serino asked him (which GZ's words in his response show he's not certain), and not GZ retelling events as he remembered them, implies that GZ's apparent recollection of that moment in particular should be taken with a grain of salt)




We don't know he had the small one, but it does appear to be the case (how else did it get there?). It doesn't make sense that GZ had the bigger non-working flashlight in his hand at the T, because it doesn't make sense that he would have held onto it for all that length of time, after he was punched in the face, presumably the blow that also broke his nose.

Yes, we do know he says he goes for his phone, but he also says it wasn't in the pocket he expected it to be in... perhaps because his large, non-working flashlight was in that pocket?

Well thats kind of the heart of it to a degree, Some of Zimmerman's statements are somewhat contradictory to what we would expect.

I too would think it makes more sense he had the small keychain flashlight in his hand when it started vs the larger non working one. But when asked its not what we get.

I consider two reason why that may happen

His memory is awful
He is being deceitful

 

[Druidx]

Since this thread has apparently gotten your attention, I have another question for you, if you don't mind. GZ's medical report... is that admissible as evidence (to support the diagnosis of GZ's injuries) without the Physician's Assistant who filled it out present?

I'm curious too, I read elsewhere that it would be. One of the lawyers in the discussion explained why GZ would not need to take the stand.
They can prove his injuries with..
The EMT who already testified his head was covered in blood and in his opinion he needed to go to the hospital to get stitches for the lacerations.
The PA’s report established the broken nose.
I forgot the witness # but it’s the lady who belongs on the HOA. She told the police she didn’t recognize Zimmerman because of his bloody face and broken nose.

 

[OCNewbie]

I forgot the witness # but it’s the lady who belongs on the HOA. She told the police she didn’t recognize Zimmerman because of his bloody face and broken nose.

Witness 11 I believe. I think she made that statement based on viewing the photo that we've all seen of GZ in the back of the officer's car, with the blood coming out of his nose.

 

[lotus503]

Witness 11 I believe. I think she made that statement based on viewing the photo that we've all seen of GZ in the back of the officer's car, with the blood coming out of his nose.

I think the injuries are consistent with self defense, many people have been granted it on far less injuries.

I do expect this will be an angle the state hammers and fails at

 

[OCNewbie]

Well thats kind of the heart of it to a degree, Some of Zimmerman's statements are somewhat contradictory to what we would expect.

I'm not sure if I would expect someone, who was already in some degree of fear (because this unknown, potential criminal, who GZ believed was likely long gone, is suddenly approaching him, and speaking to him), who subsequently takes a surprise, punch to the nose, hard enough to cause a fracture, to remember the exact details of the moments immediately surrounding that blow. If he wasn't already in panic mode at that time (he claims he was going for his phone to call 911), he certainly was after he gets punched in the face and has his nose broken, which I can't help but assume would disorient him to some degree, especially on top of the fear he likely already had.

I too would think it makes more sense he had the small keychain flashlight in his hand when it started vs the larger non working one. But when asked its not what we get.

I consider two reason why that may happen

His memory is awful
He is being deceitful

If it's memory vs. deceit in this instance, please tell me why he might lie about this particular detail? We agree that IF he's lying, he's doing it for his own benefit, yes? Did he actually have both flashlights in his hand, and decided to throw, or otherwise lost his grip on the small flashlight, right at the T, and then chased after TM south down the T with his large flashlight in his hand, then suddenly lost his grip on it near where the body was found?

It just appears to me that a faulty memory (which I think is pretty clear GZ has) matches up much better as an explanation for his comments than a lie without any apparent benefit or purpose.

 

[lotus503]

I'm not sure if I would expect someone, who was already in some degree of fear (because this unknown, potential criminal, who GZ believed was likely long gone, is suddenly approaching him, and speaking to him), who subsequently takes a surprise, punch to the nose, hard enough to cause a fracture, to remember the exact details of the moments immediately surrounding that blow. If he wasn't already in panic mode at that time (he claims he was going for his phone to call 911), he certainly was after he gets punched in the face and has his nose broken, which I can't help but assume would disorient him to some degree, especially on top of the fear he likely already had.




If it's memory vs. deceit in this instance, please tell me why he might lie about this particular detail? We agree that IF he's lying, he's doing it for his own benefit, yes? Did he actually have both flashlights in his hand, and decided to throw, or otherwise lost his grip on the small flashlight, right at the T, and then chased after TM south down the T with his large flashlight in his hand, then suddenly lost his grip on it near where the body was found?

It just appears to me that a faulty memory (which I think is pretty clear GZ has) matches up much better as an explanation for his comments than a lie without any apparent benefit or purpose.

I don't know what deceit would be covering up? frankly, and I afford Zimmerman a measure of uncertainly based on the events.

I do however prefer if possible these uncertainties/inconsistencies get hashed out for no other reason than I prefer things clean and sensible.

For the record I don't think these inconsistencies prove anything, there are merely on my wishlist of items id like solid answers on and to know exactly what occurred.

 

[werepossum]

Well thats kind of the heart of it to a degree, Some of Zimmerman's statements are somewhat contradictory to what we would expect.

I too would think it makes more sense he had the small keychain flashlight in his hand when it started vs the larger non working one. But when asked its not what we get.

I consider two reason why that may happen

His memory is awful
He is being deceitful

Considering that he'd been attacked, had his nose broken and his head slammed against the ground or pavement, and then shot someone, I'd be very disturbed if he had an excellent memory of the incident. All those are traumatic.

 

[OCNewbie]

Considering that he'd been attacked, had his nose broken and his head slammed against the ground or pavement, and then shot someone, I'd be very disturbed if he had an excellent memory of the incident. All those are traumatic.

I found this included in a Youtube video (Link) regarding this case:

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Considering that he'd been attacked, had his nose broken and his head slammed against the ground or pavement, and then shot someone, I'd be very disturbed if he had an excellent memory of the incident. All those are traumatic.

I agree. Considering the violent trauma zimmerman went through, it is understandable that he isn't able to grasp the minute details. This is common even for a 'stressful event', let alone for someone who had their skull repeatedly smashed on the concrete.

This is a small part of why zimmerman using his 5th amendment should not (legally nor morally) be held against him.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Witness 11 I believe. I think she made that statement based on viewing the photo that we've all seen of GZ in the back of the officer's car, with the blood coming out of his nose.

Very understandable, I wouldn't be surprised if he looked worse than this right after the fact. At this point it appears as though his face is smudged so some of the blood may have been wiped away.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Since this thread has apparently gotten your attention, I have another question for you, if you don't mind. GZ's medical report... is that admissible as evidence (to support the diagnosis of GZ's injuries) without the Physician's Assistant who filled it out present?

Yes, the medical record would generally be admissible as a business record without testimony by the person who actually filled it out. Typically you'd have an evidence custodian for the facility who could lay the foundation for it as a record of a regularly-conducted activity.

I would think Zimmerman might want to call the PA to testify about observations the night of the incident, rather than relying on the record. The only risk is that the PA would be free to testify about anything Zimmerman said that night.

 

[OCNewbie]

Yes, the medical record would generally be admissible as a business record without testimony by the person who actually filled it out. Typically you'd have an evidence custodian for the facility who could lay the foundation for it as a record of a regularly-conducted activity.

I would think Zimmerman might want to call the PA to testify about observations the night of the incident, rather than relying on the record. The only risk is that the PA would be free to testify about anything Zimmerman said that night.

Thank you.

Just a small correction: She actually examined him the following day; 11 A.M. I believe is the time specified in the medical report.

Trying to find a link to the report online somewhere... I have a copy of it on my computer, just not sure where to send it for hosting (in case anybody wants to see it).

 

[Fern]

Issues I have with the case I'd like to discuss.

1. Ballistics - Intermediate range, why cant they actually fire the same weapon and ammo into the same shirt/Hoodie brands and sizes at the angles to determine exactly how far 2x2 stippling is? 2 inches 10 inches I want to know.

I would think they can, and did. But I watch CSI regularly so my expectations may not be realistic.

2. Zimmerman states to serino he had a non working flashlight in his hand when attacked, why is that non working flashlight found some distance away near the body vs where attacked?

It could've been knocked out of GZ's hand during the fight, he reflexively flung it when struck.

It could've been dropped by GZ and then (inadvertently) kicked along the ground by either during the fight.

Could've have been moved or kicked (as they hurried towards the body) by paramedics.

I have always questioned the photos we've seen. They were taken after the paramedics etc finished and left. I can't imagine that they were able to completely avoid disturbing the scene while tending to the higher priority of attempting to save Trayvon's life.

So, I'm taking all that stuff shown in the photos regarding placement of items (and even Trayvon's body) with a grain of salt until we get to court and hear testimony.

Fern

 

[Fern]

Well given the shot made contact with the clothes but was intermediate with the body the distance matters a lot I think. I dont think the clothes he was wearing could sag 10 inches to produce the contact shot and intermediate range to body of say 10 inches.
It would imply that the shirt was being pulled vs sagging. introduces new questions about those final seconds.

It depends how the measurement was made. If hoodie were pulled up during the fight, think about all that arm movement and the hoodie 'creeping up' such that it's waistband is now at TM's middle chest are, I think when stretched back down you might easily find a distance of ten inches between the hole in the body and the hole in the hoodie.

Fern

 

[Druidx]

The state has issued their reply to the Omara's motion for sanctions against the state.
http://tmwarriors.files.wordpress.c...s-office-for-discovery-violations-3-28-13.pdf
BDR rips into Omara, saying he's getting his legal advice from internet trolls. Claims it's not exculpatory that their star witness lied under oath and they didn't bother to mention it. Then drags Zimmerman's brother into it as though it's legally significant.

BDL's reply sounds a lot like Crumps reply. Instead of quoting legal precedence, he quotes William Shakespeare.

 

[lotus503]

It depends how the measurement was made. If hoodie were pulled up during the fight, think about all that arm movement and the hoodie 'creeping up' such that it's waistband is now at TM's middle chest are, I think when stretched back down you might easily find a distance of ten inches between the hole in the body and the hole in the hoodie.

Fern

I totally agree there are lots of ways it could work out, I just think this is low hanging fruit and easy to simulate so it should be. Not because I think it would suggest one thing or another simply because it would add some definitive data.

 

[lotus503]

The state has issued their reply to the Omara's motion for sanctions against the state.
http://tmwarriors.files.wordpress.c...s-office-for-discovery-violations-3-28-13.pdf
BDR rips into Omara, saying he's getting his legal advice from internet trolls. Claims it's not exculpatory that their star witness lied under oath and they didn't bother to mention it. Then drags Zimmerman's brother into it as though it's legally significant.

BDL's reply sounds a lot like Crumps reply. Instead of quoting legal precedence, he quotes William Shakespeare.

Seems odd and sort of a tantrum. Not sure what to make of it. If you consider prior to evidence dumps there was somewhat of a chance the state had compelling evidence. From there it's been all disappointment for the state, maybe it's getting to them.

 

[Druidx]

At the end it includes DeeDee's original handwritten letter to TM's mom that is missing a lot of important information from her deposition and audio affidavit.

 

[Druidx]

BDR is on drugs or something. Here are his key facts to the case.
* Defendant observed TM, incorrectly profiled him as a criminal
Fair enough but I would say possible as a criminal
* Defendant called the police
True
* He followed TM and continue to do so even after told not to
One small problem, the police testified under oath there was no evidence to support that.
* Defendant confronted the victim
Two small problems, the police said there was no evidence and the state's star witness says TM initiated the verbal exchange.

BDR also complaints that Omara wrongly had a judge removed. I didn't realize Omara had that kind of power, I thought the District Court of Appeals removed Judge Lester.

 

[OCNewbie]

I'm really struggling to believe that whoever wrote this actually represents the State. I mean, c'mon, referring to "anonymous internet trolls", and then saying "such as this recent gem". Is that really the language of a State Attorney's office?

I'm gonna say I will remain skeptical as to the authenticity of this for now.

 

[lotus503]

BDR is on drugs or something. Here are his key facts to the case.
* Defendant observed TM, incorrectly profiled him as a criminal
Fair enough but I would say possible as a criminal
* Defendant called the police
True
* He followed TM and continue to do so even after told not to
One small problem, the police testified under oath there was no evidence to support that.
* Defendant confronted the victim
Two small problems, the police said there was no evidence and the state's star witness says TM initiated the verbal exchange.

BDR also complaints that Omara wrongly had a judge removed. I didn't realize Omara had that kind of power, I thought the District Court of Appeals removed Judge Lester.

Here is the thing I have been trying to figure out how this all went down and how the state would contend murder 2 given what we know. Not only can I not get there but I do agree via John the witness not only do they not have murder 2 but they would be hard pressed to have anything at all.

This has got to be killing BDR. Because zimmermans story has holes in my opinion, maybe they thought ballistics would yield something else I don't know.

I'm dying to know how the state plans to make its case. Because up until recently they have been pretty cocky.

 

[Druidx]

I'm really struggling to believe that whoever wrote this actually represents the State. I mean, c'mon, referring to "anonymous internet trolls", and then saying "such as this recent gem". Is that really the language of a State Attorney's office?

I'm gonna say I will remain skeptical as to the authenticity of this for now.

I remember early on there was another response BDR filed which was all over the place, DVC even commented on how horribly it was written. I guess he couldn't argue the legality of Omara's motion so he was left quoting Shakespeare.