|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
On July 02 2013 03:32 Defacer wrote:
I can't watch the trial live. Has the prosecution been able to dig up anything that might indicate Zimmerman started the altercation (other than that Zimmerman may have followed him)?
It's going to be really difficult. By all accounts thus far it seems that there were no eyewitnesses to the beginning of the altercation.
|
On July 02 2013 03:33 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:27 dAPhREAk wrote:
DA yelling at his own witness again. must have been some damaging testimony. lol.
what a shitty DA. Is it the only witness they can call to get the evidence they need? I've been down that road of coaching an idiot to testify in a reasonable manner and its not fun.
not sure. the DA just has a habit of raising his voice at his own witnesses whenever they give bad testimony. he is trying to bully them into responding how he wants, but he just looks amateurish.
|
On July 02 2013 03:32 Defacer wrote:
I can't watch the trial live. Has the prosecution been able to dig up anything that might indicate Zimmerman started the altercation (other than that Zimmerman may have followed him)?
at this point, i think all people with personal knowledge (eye and ear witnesses) have concluded.
|
On July 02 2013 03:24 nihlon wrote:
It would probably be hard to get a doctors/medical expert to say something else than that head injuries have the potential to lead to serious injury.
Actually, doctors should only be able to say that blows to the head have the potential to lead to serious injury.
Injuries to the head are simply injuries that are present on the head. The doctor *could* say that lack of medical treatment *could* lead to exacerbation of current injuries.
So, technically, the doctor can really only say that Trayvon's blow to the head resulted in the injuries currently present on the client. Prior to the impact of Trayvon's blow, that is where the potential for serious injury to occur. And one can theoretically argue that before the point of contact is when Zimmerman could be scared of potential serious injury.
|
On July 02 2013 03:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:24 nihlon wrote:
It would probably be hard to get a doctors/medical expert to say something else than that head injuries have the potential to lead to serious injury. Actually, doctors should only be able to say that blows to the head have the potential to lead to serious injury. Injuries to the head are simply injuries that are present on the head. The doctor *could* say that lack of medical treatment *could* lead to exacerbation of current injuries. So, technically, the doctor can really only say that Trayvon's blow to the head resulted in the injuries currently present on the client. Prior to the impact of Trayvon's blow, that is where the potential for serious injury to occur. And one can theoretically argue that before the point of contact is when Zimmerman could be scared of potential serious injury.
Are you actually arguing that Zimmerman could no longer have been reasonably scared of serious injury after receiving the first blow to his head while Trayvon was still on top of him?
|
I'm not familiar with police interrogation but is it often this shallow? Or was that just a preliminary interrogation?
I mean, no questions about whether or not Martin touched the holster or the gun or if Zimmerman fought back in any way for example seem pretty weird.
|
On July 02 2013 03:38 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:32 Defacer wrote:
I can't watch the trial live. Has the prosecution been able to dig up anything that might indicate Zimmerman started the altercation (other than that Zimmerman may have followed him)?
at this point, i think all people with personal knowledge (eye and ear witnesses) have concluded.
Soooooo ... that's it, isn't it? What can the prosecution possibly do to prove that it wasn't self-defense at this point? Isn't that the crux of their whole argument?
|
Neither of these legal teams seem to understand what a ban on speaking objections means.......
|
On July 02 2013 03:47 Diavlo wrote:
I'm not familiar with police interrogation but is it often this shallow? Or was that just a preliminary interrogation?
I mean, no questions about whether or not Martin touched the holster or the gun or if Zimmerman fought back in any way for example seem pretty weird.
i had the same reaction. it seemed like the investigator just wanted to get it over with and write-off the kid's death.
|
On July 02 2013 03:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:24 nihlon wrote:
It would probably be hard to get a doctors/medical expert to say something else than that head injuries have the potential to lead to serious injury. Actually, doctors should only be able to say that blows to the head have the potential to lead to serious injury. Injuries to the head are simply injuries that are present on the head. The doctor *could* say that lack of medical treatment *could* lead to exacerbation of current injuries. So, technically, the doctor can really only say that Trayvon's blow to the head resulted in the injuries currently present on the client. Prior to the impact of Trayvon's blow, that is where the potential for serious injury to occur. And one can theoretically argue that before the point of contact is when Zimmerman could be scared of potential serious injury.
The jury's opinion of "reasonable fear" could be greatly influenced by who started the altercation and how it took place. Sadly, since there are few eye witnesses, it is all conjecture and there is no way to prove who had the "upper hand" in the fight.
|
On July 02 2013 03:50 dAPhREAk wrote:
i had the same reaction. it seemed like the investigator just wanted to get it over with and write-off the kid's death.
Not justifying it or anything, but I think his colleague already had her time with Zimmerman and he was just going through the motions.
|
On July 02 2013 03:50 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:47 Diavlo wrote:
I'm not familiar with police interrogation but is it often this shallow? Or was that just a preliminary interrogation?
I mean, no questions about whether or not Martin touched the holster or the gun or if Zimmerman fought back in any way for example seem pretty weird.
i had the same reaction. it seemed like the investigator just wanted to get it over with and write-off the kid's death.
Remember how long it took them to get the police just to arrest Zimmerman and all the horrible press that police department was receiving at the time? Your assessment isn't far off from what was reported at the time.
|
On July 02 2013 03:50 farvacola wrote:
Neither of these legal teams seem to understand what a ban on speaking objections means.......
a common malady among attorneys.
|
I'm kinda half paying attention. That said, where all of the inconsistencies?
|
On July 02 2013 03:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 03:24 nihlon wrote:
It would probably be hard to get a doctors/medical expert to say something else than that head injuries have the potential to lead to serious injury. Actually, doctors should only be able to say that blows to the head have the potential to lead to serious injury. Injuries to the head are simply injuries that are present on the head. The doctor *could* say that lack of medical treatment *could* lead to exacerbation of current injuries. So, technically, the doctor can really only say that Trayvon's blow to the head resulted in the injuries currently present on the client. Prior to the impact of Trayvon's blow, that is where the potential for serious injury to occur. And one can theoretically argue that before the point of contact is when Zimmerman could be scared of potential serious injury. The jury's opinion of "reasonable fear" could be greatly influenced by who started the altercation and how it took place. Sadly, since there are few eye witnesses, it is all conjecture and there is no way to prove who had the "upper hand" in the fight.
Doesn't the fact that Zimmerman suffered injuries, while Martin (aside from the gunshot wound) did not, mean that Martin had the upper hand?
It seems pretty conclusive to me, though I'm no lawyer.
|
On July 02 2013 03:56 xDaunt wrote:
I'm kinda half paying attention. That said, where all of the inconsistencies?
Being entered as we speak
|
admittedly, this is the first time i have watched the whole video. so much makes sense with zimmerman's story after watching it.
|
On July 02 2013 03:56 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:50 Plansix wrote:On July 02 2013 03:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 03:24 nihlon wrote:
It would probably be hard to get a doctors/medical expert to say something else than that head injuries have the potential to lead to serious injury. Actually, doctors should only be able to say that blows to the head have the potential to lead to serious injury. Injuries to the head are simply injuries that are present on the head. The doctor *could* say that lack of medical treatment *could* lead to exacerbation of current injuries. So, technically, the doctor can really only say that Trayvon's blow to the head resulted in the injuries currently present on the client. Prior to the impact of Trayvon's blow, that is where the potential for serious injury to occur. And one can theoretically argue that before the point of contact is when Zimmerman could be scared of potential serious injury. The jury's opinion of "reasonable fear" could be greatly influenced by who started the altercation and how it took place. Sadly, since there are few eye witnesses, it is all conjecture and there is no way to prove who had the "upper hand" in the fight. Doesn't the fact that Zimmerman suffered injuries, while Martin (aside from the gunshot wound) did not, mean that Martin had the upper hand? It seems pretty conclusive to me, though I'm no lawyer.
Just because you are injured doesn't mean you are going to die. Or to put it another way, most fights in a club or bar do not rise to a level where deadly force would be acceptable. But, once again, you need eye witness of that fight to prove it. Since Zimmerman is claiming he felt Martian was trying to kill him and other witnesses such limited information, it is tough to refute his word.
|
On July 02 2013 03:47 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 03:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 03:24 nihlon wrote:
It would probably be hard to get a doctors/medical expert to say something else than that head injuries have the potential to lead to serious injury. Actually, doctors should only be able to say that blows to the head have the potential to lead to serious injury. Injuries to the head are simply injuries that are present on the head. The doctor *could* say that lack of medical treatment *could* lead to exacerbation of current injuries. So, technically, the doctor can really only say that Trayvon's blow to the head resulted in the injuries currently present on the client. Prior to the impact of Trayvon's blow, that is where the potential for serious injury to occur. And one can theoretically argue that before the point of contact is when Zimmerman could be scared of potential serious injury. Are you actually arguing that Zimmerman could no longer have been reasonably scared of serious injury after receiving the first blow to his head while Trayvon was still on top of him?
I was technically specifying a difference between what leads to injuries and the presence of injuries.
A blow to the head can lead to a head injury.
Presence of head injury does not lead to a head injury.
If Zimmerman was struck once, and no more, then the doctor can only say that the strike lead to a specific injury.
If Zimmerman was struck "MMA Style," then the doctor can say that each successive blow could lead to head injuries with each additional blow increasing the chance for said injury.
Specifically;
- If Trayvon charged at him and he shot trayvon before a blow landed--the doctor can say that the strike could lead to a head injury.
- If Zimmerman shot Trayvon after the first hit but was threatened with follow up hits, then the doctor could say that those blows could lead to a serious head injury.
But the doctor can't say that the existence of head injuries automatically leads to more head injuries without a catalyst.
|
this complex has the shittiest lighting. wtf. no lights on the green belt....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
