Fox Reports this AM........

- Autopsy shows the body of TM had amounts of THC.

- TM's knuckles are bruised.

- Eye witness says GZ yelled for help 14 times while being pummled martial arts style by TM who was on top of him.

- TM was hit with 1 round from a distance of 1 to 18 inches away.

 

Stay tuned...........

hmmm... info just keeps amassing

Did anyone watch the convenience store video of TM struggling to make change and getting confused on how to exit the store?

 

 

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/surveillance-video-trayvon-martin-at-store-night/vHLg7/

 

TM was no small person if you see how he towers over the store clerk. Furthermore, does the clerk appear nervous? Watch his body motions.

Fox Reports this AM........

- Autopsy shows the body of TM had amounts of THC.

- TM's knuckles are bruised.

- Eye witness says GZ yelled for help 14 times while being pummled by TM who was on top of him.

- TM was hit with 1 round from a distance of 1 to 5 inches away.

 

Stay tuned...........

 

1-18 inches.

 

Also, witness says Zimmerman called for help. Police say someone called for help 14 times. Nitpicky yes...but facts matter.

 

1-18 inches.

 

Trace amounts of thc. It stays in your system for a month so it is unlikely he was High on the reefer madness...lol.

 

Also, witness says Zimmerman called for help. Police say someone called for help 14 times. Nitpicky yes...but facts matter.

Fox Reports this AM........

- Autopsy shows the body of TM had amounts of THC.

- TM's knuckles are bruised.

- Eye witness says GZ yelled for help 14 times while being pummled martial arts style by TM who was on top of him.

- TM was hit with 1 round from a distance of 1 to 18 inches away.

 

Stay tuned...........

 

Screw fox news as an unbiased news source.

 

some more facts of the case as reported by AP:

• Autopsy results show Trayvon Martin had marijuana in his system and that he was shot through the heart at close range.
  

• George Zimmerman had a broken nose, bruises and bloody cuts on the back of his head. "Bleeding tenderness to his nose, and a small laceration to the back of his head. All injuries have minor bleeding," paramedic Michael Brandy wrote about Zimmerman's injuries in the report.
  
• The lead investigator called for Zimmerman's arrest in a report written March 13, a month before the actual arrest. The investigator, Christopher Serino, told prosecutors the fight could have been avoided if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle. He said Zimmerman could have identified himself to Martin, then talked to him, rather than confronting him. There is no evidence Martin was involved in any criminal activity, Serino said.
  
• Serino wrote in a report that he played a 911 call for Martin's father, Tracy, in which screams for help are heard multiple times. "I asked Mr. Martin if the voice calling for help was that of his son," the officer wrote. "Mr. Martin, clearly emotionally impacted by the recording, quietly responded 'no.'" Zimmerman's father also listened to the recording and told investigators on March 19 that it was his son yelling for help. "That is absolutely positively George Zimmerman," Robert Zimmerman said. "He was not just yelling, he sounded like he was screaming for his life."
  
• An unnamed woman told an investigator in a police interview that she stays away from Zimmerman because he's racist and because of things he's done to her in the past, but she didn't elaborate on what happened between them. "I don't at all know who this kid was or anything else. But I know George, and I know that he does not like black people. He would start something. He's very confrontational. It's in his blood. We'll just say that," the woman says in an audio recording.
  
• An unnamed man told investigators said he worked with Zimmerman in 2008 for a few months. The man, who described his heritage as "Middle Eastern," said Zimmerman bullied him at work. Zimmerman wanted to "get in" with the clique at work who did not like the man, so Zimmerman exaggerated a Middle Eastern accent, and made reference to terrorists and bombings when talking about him. "It was so immature," said the employee, who complained to management about Zimmerman. Zimmerman's parents say he wasn't racist. They said he mentored black students and had a black relative.
  

 

More info @ http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hCdykoIjmPMAgLTFzxHVIydZIECQ?docId=3f268f957ba44ecdba44ed43b71e48e1

The reason why gun advocates get just as bad of a rap from this as the folk that called for Z's head on a platter is that assumption of guilt or innocence was made by all parties without having evidence like this being presented. We look bad because we defended his actions based on his rights instead of whether he was justified in executing that right , and the antis argue that a kid was dead at the hands of a gun wielding vigilante. This is why the case needed to go to court from the get go to decide whether or not he invoked the argument leading to the shooting.

Invoked the argument? Can you explain what you mean.?

Im not speculating whether or not he had been in his right to defend himself being in fear for his life, but if he reported the incident and stayed within the safety of his own vehicle, none of this would have happened. While there is no law requiring him to standfast and not do anything, or even following dispatchers recommendation for that matter, leaving his vehicle set the wheels in motion for the events that followed. He acknowledged there was a sketchy situation where law enforcement was warranted, why would you further involve yourself after that decision has been made.

 

Perhaps invoked the argument was a bad descriptive.

leaving his vehicle set the wheels in motion for the events that followed.

 

I was unaware that your right to self defense in Florida is nullified if you leave your vehicle.

 

If you want to go into causative events If TM hadn't been suspended from School for pot, he'd still be alive. If TM's daddy had kept him at home, it wouldn't have happened. If TM had run away at the first sign of someone, he'd still be alive. We can do this all night. None of it matters. What matters is if George Zimmerman was in fear of his life when he pulled the trigger.

 

The real issue is that if George Zimmerman's surname had been Lopez or Padilla or Sanchez, we would have never heard of this case.

You do realize, however, that that is not relevant to his guilt. It is not relevant even who started the physical fight.

 

Saying he was asking for trouble by not staying put and therefore responding for the outcome is not appropriate here. He didn't ask to be assaulted (if indeed he was) any more than I ask to be mugged by riding the subway.

 

The salient point is whether it can be proven that GZs means of retreat were prevented by trayvon martin AND Zimmerman could reasonably believe his life was in danger.

 

Frankly, if both of those things are true, it doesn't matter if GZ chased the kid down, screamed in his face and decked him. Standard self defense in Florida applies.

 

Facts matter and so does the letter of the law.

You do realize, however, that that is not relevant to his guilt. It is not relevant even who started the physical fight.

 

Saying he was asking for trouble by not staying put and therefore responding for the outcome is not appropriate here. He didn't ask to be assaulted (if indeed he was) any more than I ask to be mugged by riding the subway.

 

The salient point is whether it can be proven that GZs means of retreat were prevented by trayvon martin AND Zimmerman could reasonably believe his life was in danger.

 

Frankly, if both of those things are true, it doesn't matter if GZ chased the kid down, screamed in his face and decked him. Standard self defense in Florida applies.

 

Facts matter and so does the letter of the law.

 

There is no duty to retreat in Florida but it doesn't matter. When you're on your back getting your head slammed into the pavement, it's safe to say your means of retreat have been prevented.

<p>

There is no duty to retreat in Florida but it doesn't matter. When you're on your back getting your head slammed into the pavement, it's safe to say your means of retreat has been prevented.

Naturally. I was not rebutting your post but rather commenting on the one above by rubberbullets.

If GZ chased the kid down, yelled in his face, and decked him, they Trayvon would have been acting in self defense. The initial attacker is not entitled to raise self defense as an issue when the person he attacks fights back.

What will ultimately get Z's acquittal will be the lack of witness during the events leading up to and including the confrontation prior to the final moments of the fight. The lead investigator himself felt compelled that a charge was necessary given the facts of the case.

 

Leaving the vehicle certainly played a part of the events that occurred. TM did not approach him inside his vehicle, he left with the strict intent to intervene and interrogate a person who apparently was doing nothing other then look a certain way in his accuser's eye. I guess we can argue all we want over who was right and wrong, but since there were no witnesses as to who started the fight, there should be further scrutiny as to his guilt or innocence.

 

I really am just tired of seeing the blatant support one way or another without the facts. Of course I might have found myself emotionally tied up and passing judgement in the first month, but even now it seems like there is a court of public opinion with information still being omitted from news sources. Its in the courts, where I think it should be. Allow our justice system to hash it out.

If GZ chased the kid down, yelled in his face, and decked him, they Trayvon would have been acting in self defense. The initial attacker is not entitled to raise self defense as an issue when the person he attacks fights back.

 

This is false when compared against Florida's Self Defense Law.

 

Self Defense does not apply for an aggressor of violent action UNLESS they attempt to retreat and end said violent action and are prevented from retreat. Read the law:

 

 

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

If GZ chased the kid down, yelled in his face, and decked him, they Trayvon would have been acting in self defense. The initial attacker is not entitled to raise self defense as an issue when the person he attacks fights back.

 

It can change, second to second. If you beat someone within an inch of their life, withdraw and the person gets up and starts slamming your head into the pavement, you would have a case for self defense.

What will ultimately get Z's acquittal will be the lack of witness during the events leading up to and including the confrontation prior to the final moments of the fight. The lead investigator himself felt compelled that a charge was necessary given the facts of the case.

 

Leaving the vehicle certainly played a part of the events that occurred. TM did not approach him inside his vehicle, he left with the strict intent to intervene and interrogate a person who apparently was doing nothing other then look a certain way in his accuser's eye. I guess we can argue all we want over who was right and wrong, but since there were no witnesses as to who started the fight, there should be further scrutiny as to his guilt or innocence.

 

I really am just tired of seeing the blatant support one way or another without the facts. Of course I might have found myself emotionally tied up and passing judgement in the first month, but even now it seems like there is a court of public opinion with information still being omitted from news sources. Its in the courts, where I think it should be. Allow our justice system to hash it out.

 

My opinion is that the conviction hinges on whether or not Trayvon Martin reasonably believed that his life was in iminent danger from George Zimmerman. Did Trayvon Martin know Zimmmerman had a gun? Was he using deadly force against an aggressor because he knew that it was his life or Zimmerman's? What kind of holster did Zimmerman have? Did it print? Did he display his firearm at the outset of the confrontation?

 

These are all tough things to PROVE. But who started the fight or whether Zimmerman got out of his car, I don't think are as relevant.

If Zimmerman started the fight, his argument of self defense would be baseless. He would in turn be the aggressor. Without that all of the above mentioned is what the case is based on. Since all of the testimony of the argument will be that of the guy on trial for murder, I think his account will certainly be in favor of his innocence. So yes, lack of a witness as to who started a fight will be a MAJOR factor in the acquittal of George Zimmerman whether the witness would have proved his innocence or stated the contrary.

If Zimmerman started the fight, his argument of self defense would be baseless. He would in turn be the aggressor. Without that all of the above mentioned is what the case is based on. Since all of the testimony of the argument will be that of the guy on trial for murder, I think his account will certainly be in favor of his innocence. So yes, lack of a witness as to who started a fight will be a MAJOR factor in the acquittal of George Zimmerman whether the witness would have proved his innocence or stated the contrary.

 

Whether or not he started the fight is not relevant with regards to Florida law. I re-post

 

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

 

Two eyewitnesses say that Zimmerman was prostrate on the ground being beaten, his escape hindered. Even IF he started the fight, standard self defense would apply because Trayvon Martin prevented his escape. So, you see...having a witness as to who started the fight is NOT a major factor with regards to Florida's self defense law.

 

I still think that if there were some way to prove that Trayvon Martin KNEW that Zimmerman was armed with a firearm, and feared for HIS life, then it would be more likely to convict Zimmerman. Otherwise, there needs to be more evidence in order to convict.

And.............if TM went home and not circled back to confront and assault GZ...then none of this would have happened.

IMO............TM was the aggressor as GZ story seems to be +1.

 

2nd Degree................Nope.

And believe me....if George Zimmerman acted outside the rule of law in shooting Trayvon Martin, then I hope they can prove it. I would hope he goes to prison for the rest of his natural life. Good luck in GenPop because they're going to cut his balls off and flush them down the toilet.

 

 

That being said, I don't think the facts bear that out.

The trial-by-media continues:

 

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/zimmerman_tells_cops_trayvon_martin_McSJd59PkDJfTcZP3CYVzH#ixzz1yRbx1JRT

 

...

That's when, Zimmerman claimed, Martin spotted the volunteer's gun.

 

"I feel like he saw it," Zimmerman said. "He looked at it and he said 'You're going to die tonight mother f--ker and he reached for it."

I'm so sick of this Sh*t it's not even funny... i wish the news would just stop reporting on it, they aren't doing anything but dividing people. let the trial run its course and report all the fudd you want.

Zimmerman was found guilty a soon as the initial news reports broke out, the Miami heat takes a photo with their hoodies on, and lovely Obama making his ridiculous statement.... All before ANY evidence was brought in. The media and there ratings hungry reporters are to blame for the inability to find a truly unbiased jury (when the time arises). It disgusts me. I'm not saying he did or did not act within the law, but these reports are making it so nothing will really matter.... I.e. at work a couple months ago I brought it up around te lunch table (all women since I am a teacher) and they all immediately crusified him. Suddenly I show them different information and their minds suddenly become more optimistic. Hhhmmmm

Here's Zimmerman's video walk thru of what he says happened..

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/21/video-shows-zimmerman-account-fatal-fight/?test=latestnews