Tweet
Cross posted from Frederick Leatherman Law Blog
Editor’s Note: See also Practicum: Do You Have a Reasonable Doubt that George Zimmerman Killed in Self-Defense? -MyFDL Editor
Trayvon Martin's Parents at a rally for justice (Photo: David Shankbone / Flickr).
I have suspected all along that Trayvon Martin’s cell phone would turn out to be the smoking gun in the Zimmerman case and I offer the following evidence for consideration and comment.
At the 4:47 mark during Detective Serino’s interview of George Zimmerman, after Zimmerman admits that he shot Trayvon Martin with a hollow point bullet, Zimmerman suddenly volunteers,
When he was hitting me, I don’t know what he was hitting me with. I thought he had something in his hands, so I grabbed his hands when I was on top of him and I spread his hands away from his body because he was still talking and I was on top of him. And that’s when somebody came and they had a flashlight too and I thought it was a police officer, so I got off him.
In addition to claiming that Trayvon had banged his head against pavement, Zimmerman also told the EMT at the crime scene, when the EMT was cleaning his wounds with peroxide, that he had been struck with an unknown blunt instrument.
The report concludes:
Cause of injury: Struck by blunt/thrown object (9640) Mechanism of Injury: Blunt.
We know that Trayvon Martin was not armed and the police recovered only one thing near Trayvon’s body that could have served as a blunt instrument: His cell phone, which was lying in the grass next to his body.
The cell phone is Exhibit DMS 7.
The police submitted Exhibit DMS 7 to the Crime Lab with a request for a latent print examination. See Lab Report dated March 12, 2012 (see page 119)
The results:
No latent print examinations were performed per information received from Special Agent Supervisor David Lee.
Exhibit DMS-7 was returned to the agency.
The use of fingerprint powder to dust an object for possible prints (the fine powder adheres to the oil ridges left by the print making it possible to see the print and “lift” it from the object using special tape) can interfere with a DNA analysis and make it impossible to obtain a result. For this reason, one must always do a DNA analysis first.
According to Trayvon’s girlfriend, just before the connection terminated, she heard Trayvon ask,
Why are you following me?
Then she heard a male voice respond,
What are you doing here?
Then she heard what sounded like Trayvon’s headset being yanked out of the phone.
She tried calling him back, but he never answered.
I suspect the phone was resubmitted to the DNA lab for analysis, and if it was not submitted, it should be because it may have George Zimmerman’s DNA on it.
I don’t know about y’all, but I do not believe Trayvon would have confronted George Zimmerman while he was talking to his girlfriend and suddenly started wailing on Zimmerman with his cell phone.
I can easily imagine, however, Trayvon hitting Zimmerman in self-defense with the cell phone because he had it in his hand and it was the only thing he had to use as a weapon when Zimmerman attacked him.
Do y’all think that the prosecutors know they have the trump card and they have not released the lab report to prove it because they want to hold it back as long as possible?
I want to see that report.
80 Comments
I want to see that report too but in the meanwhile, it’s a great theory but that’s all and it will probably have to wait for the trial for confirmation. Thank you for continuing to cover this.
Good point. What are you? A lawyer or something?
(Good thing we have lawyers!)
I’ve often thought the same in re to Trayvon’s cell. In that short, but intense, altercation I’d wager that Trayvon may have smacked GZ’s nose with his cell. I’ve often wondered why the cell was returned to the police without having been tested for DNA. Could it have been tested after the document dump in mid-May?
BTW, the black flashlight which was tagged at the crime scene has aroused my curiosity also. Did the black flashlight belong to a resident at Twin Lakes, was it GZ’s, or maybe even Trayvon’s? Was it tested? Could the flashlight have been the blunt instrument that was used by Trayvon to smack GZ?
Recall too that Trayvon’s girlfriend claimed Trayvon told her he was thinking of running because Zimmerman was following him. She told him not to. It seems odd that Trayvon would do a 180 and decide to confront Zimmerman.
I don’t think the case will go to trial.
I’m thinking plea bargain to, at the very least, save his wife and possibly himself from a perjury charge.
I believe the black flashlight may have been Zimmerman’s. He was carrying a flashlight that night, but he told Serino that it was not working.
Serino told him it worked for him.
IIRC, the neighbor who showed up with a flashlight just ahead of the cop also left or dropped his flashlight at the scene.
The first aid kit, btw, was left by the medics.
I’m not certain, but I thought she told him to run from the creepy guy, which he did.
Some lawyers, anyway.
Hey Mason:
If Trayvon was a white guy and Zimmerman was a black guy, this would have been settled long ago at the end of a rope.
I believe this comes under the rubric of good old fashioned Southern justice:
Swift and racially motivated.
Thanks and by all means recommended.
Possibly – I could see GZ grabbing Trayvon to try to detain him, and Trayvon lashing out with the cell phone, but wouldn’t the can of iced tea be a better weapon? Was it still in the bag at that point, or in the pocket? If it was already in the pocket, then the cell phone would be the only quickly available projectile.
The Black guy gets it either way and not just in the South.
The iced tea was in the pouch pocket of the sweatshirt hoodie when the cops rolled him over and started administering CPR. One of them felt it and pulled it out.
The cell phone was lying right next to the body and the spent casing was found under the body after it was removed to the ME’s office.
The bullet was a hollow point, which explains why there was so much damage inside the chest cavity and no exit wound.
A hollow point explodes on contact and it was designed to kill.
I’m not exactly understanding what the report could/would show that could serve as a “smoking gun.”
Zimmerman DNA could indicate he was struck with the device; but it doesn’t seem to answer any of the questions related to the circumstance. It seems such evidence could bolster either an attack narrative or a self defense one depending how the observer decides to interpret it. Or is it the lack of DNA that would be a definitive?
Zimmerman told Detective Mary Singleton in Part 2 of the interview around the 3-minute mark, as she was questioning him about the diagram that he drew to illustrate his story, that Trayvon passed him while he was parked in his vehicle at the by the clubhouse, looked at him, and then continued on along the sidewalk and out of his line of sight.
He told her that is when he called the non-emergency number at the SPD.
He said he moved his vehicle forward and parked.
Then Trayvon returned and circled his vehicle.
He said he did not know where Trayvon came from.
Trayvon then walked away back into the darkness and disappeared.
He said he was not sure where he went.
This varies significantly from what he told the dispatcher.
Only if you believe it’s just as likely that Trayvon would have attacked Zimmerman and deliberately hit him with the cell phone while he was talking to his girlfriend.
And even if you assume his girlfriend was lying, despite her cell phone records that show her phone was connected to his phone, he had a can of Arizona Iced Tea in the front pouch pocket of his hoodie that could have been a larger, heavier and more effective blunt instrument — and considerably less expensive — than the cell phone.
Maybe you see it differently, but a cell phone is a pretty important communication device to most kids and I don’t think they would likely use one as a weapon unless it was in their hand or at hand when they were attacked and they were really frightened.
Ergo, he used his cell phone in self-defense when Zimmerman attacked him.
Hence, the cell phone potentially is the “smoking gun” that solves the case.
BTW, I believe all of Zimmerman’s wounds probably were caused by the cell phone.
I think he made up the story about having his head slammed into the sidewalk repeatedly. The wounds do not support that story.
And don’t forget he told the EMT he was hit by a blunt object.
This varies significantly from what he told the dispatcher.
To put it mildly. He was on the phone with the dispatcher when he mentioned this: “that Trayvon passed him while he was parked in his vehicle at the by the clubhouse, looked at him, and then continued on along the sidewalk and out of his line of sight.”
Nothing about Trayvon returning and circling his vehicle.
And I find this remarkable:
When he was hitting me, I don’t know what he was hitting me with. I thought he had something in his hands, so I grabbed his hands when I was on top of him and I spread his hands away from his body because he was still talking and I was on top of him. And that’s when somebody came and they had a flashlight too and I thought it was a police officer, so I got off him.
This was after he shot TM. “Still talking”? I don’t think was possible considering he shot TM in the heart and his lungs collapsed. Also, TM was found with his hands under his body.
Yep, the hollow point bullet exploded inside his chest destroying the right ventricle of his heart and collapsed both lungs. He could not have been pushing air through his vocal cords to make any sound and that is why the screaming stopped immediately after the shot.
Yes, however, the DNA Lab could have tested it before the document dump and the prosecution might have withheld it to gain a tactical advantage.
The prosecution released only a small portion of its file. Discovery in homicide cases usually runs into the thousands of pages.
Now keep in mind that blood transfers to a blunt instrument on the second and subsequent blows. Blood never transfers on the first blow.
Blood will transfer to the blunt instrument on the second blow impacting the same wound and it will also spatter.
Therefore, it’s possible that no blood transferred to the cell phone even if Trayvon hit him across the bridge of the nose and twice on the back of the head creating three separate wounds
Picture Trayvon screaming for help as Zimmerman attempts to silence Trayvon the same way he claims Trayvon attempted to silence him. His exhibition during the video reenactment is chilling because of the way he holds and moves his hands. I got the impression he was showing what he did, not what Trayvon did.
Zimmerman never mentioned doing anything with his hands in an attempt to prevent Trayvon from smothering him, which does not make any sense. Instead, he says he tried to wiggle and slide down further under him so Trayvon could not continue to pound his head into the cement. He doesn’t even mention stiffening his neck or attempting to bite Trayvon, or bear hugging him in an effort to roll him.
The slide appears to be a contrived effort to account for Trayvon supposedly seeing his concealed weapon and reaching for it.
He told Serino that he thought Trayvon was hitting him with a brick. Trayvon was probably hitting Zimmerman with the cell phone and screaming for help as Zimmerman was attempting to smother him.
I imagine the pain made him angry. He lost his temper, pulled out his gin and shot him.
What a sad and terrible tragedy.
Maybe a minor point, but not really – can we just refer to these people by their initials (TM, GZ)?
While my own personal (worthless, of course) opinion at this point is that Zimmerman is a murderer, I do find weird the references to TM as “Trayvon” (familiarizing, humanizing) vs. references to GM as “Zimmerman” (the opposite). If TM is gonna be “Trayvon,” then GZ should be “George,” no?
“Zimmerman” is also a pain in the ass to type. Hence my suggestion.
Carry on.
Note: I am going to change the title to:
Could Trayvon Martin’s Cellphone be the Key to Solving the Zimmerman Case?
I don’t have the information (or expertise, really) to make assertions of any sort, so I’m not particularly “thinking” anything. I simply didn’t intuitively follow your logic behind an assertion that DNA forensics from the cell phone could (or are likely to) be *the* definitive bit of evidence that locked up the case.
I’m certainly not willing to concede the idea that because kids are generally attached to their cellular devices that in an unplanned altercation, a kid would hesitate to react by using it as weapon. I don’t think the Zimmerman defense is contesting that he followed Martin and confronted him. The question is how that confrontation went down.
Based on the statements of his girlfriend, Martin’s state of mind was that he felt targeted, stalked and in danger. Likewise, statements from Zimmerman recorded on the 911 call indicated he felt that he was in visual contact with a potential criminal.
It seems like what happened after the brief exchange of words Martin’s girlfriend heard before the call was terminated is still in question. Additionally the words of both individuals superficially seem to bolster assertions of both states of mind at the time of the incident.
So, did a fearful Martin react to being accosted by immediately hitting Zimmerman with whatever was handy and trying to “escape”? If so, would Zimmerman – who asserts he believed himself to be confronting a potential criminal (a belief that is seemingly supported by his 9/11 calls) – have valid recourse under the law? Or did Zimmerman immediately launch an outright physical attack with Martin desperately doing whatever he could to defend himself?
That seems to be a crucial question that I’m not seeing answered definitively either way by the simple existence of DNA on Martin’s cell phone.
Hey. I just noticed. 911 and 9/11 are *not* the same thing. Funny that I’m now programmed to render that grouping of numbers as a date.
Really. The whole thing is so incredibly dispiriting, it makes me feel like the wrung-out Atticus at the end of “To Kill a Mockingbird.” If it were stuck on a loop.
Caveat: unless blood was already present for some reason when the first blow with a specific blunt instrument occurred. Although, if we’re talking about a cell phone, I don’t think “blunt instrument” is necessarily an accurate description of the object – there are often sharp corners and other protrusions that could potentially cut in addition to causing blunt trauma.
This is a reply to kgb999 @ 22
You are certainly free to disagree, but I do not believe you are being realistic.
My point is he would not have used his cellphone in a planned attack, but he would have used it in self-defense, if it were in his hand.
Also, Zimmerman denies that he followed Martin and confronted him. He told the police Martin was hiding behind some bushes, which are nowhere to be seen btw, or he appeared out of the darkness as he (Zimmerman) was walking back to his vehicle and punched him in the nose, knocking him down.
Am I making more sense to you now?
Zimmerman was not a cop and he had no lawful authority to stop Martin and question him for any reason, let alone touch or attempt to restrain him in any way.
He was not a cop and even a cop btw could not have lawfully detained Martin because he did not do anything suspicious. A cop has to have a reasonable suspicion to detain someone briefly to investigate whether a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed. A reasonable suspicion is more than a hunch. It requires articulable facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to suspect that the person being observed has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.
Any person in Martin’s position would have been legally entitled to use force to resist Zimmerman’s use of force against him, including deadly force, if he reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of being killed or suffering grievous bodily harm.
So, no. Nothing Zimmerman told the dispatcher justified an investigatory stop and he acted at his own peril in doing so.
Zimmerman was a neighbnorhood watch guy and police instruct them never to contact, approach or attempt to detain a suspicious person because that is a job for the police.
He had been instructed not to do that and he told the police that he did not do that.
I have been thinking about the head wounds. I have seen a lot of head versus asphalt and head versus cement, when I worked as a nurse in trauma ICU and also in trauma orthopedics. In the injuries I have observed that were sustained this way, there was road rash, or jagged cuts, and diffuse bruising, but not neat, isolated cuts.
A skinned knee, for example, is what something smacking the pavement looks like. Repeated head slamming into the sidewalk might look a bit more like this head-versus-pavement photo:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jevoncarlson/2443331499/lightbox/
Well, sure. That’s what I meant by a bleeding wound already has to be present, although I was assuming that the first blow caused the bleeding wound.
If you examine the two little cuts on the back of Zimmerman’s head, you can see where they don’t look like a rash of any kind. I’d say his wounds were more likely caused by being hit with a cell phone than having his head repeatedly smashed against a cement sidewalk.
If I were on the prosecution team, I would be consulting some medical experts regarding what might have caused those wounds.
My wife, Crane-Station, posted something more specific just ahead of this.
Initials are fine.
I referred to Martin as Trayvon because he was a kid and I referred to Zimmerman as Zimmerman, rather than George, because he is an adult.
I generally refer to kids by their first names and adults by their last names.
Don’t you?
But I agree that typing Zimmerman is a pain, although I’ve just about got my fingers trained to do it.
Yes, that’s the kind of wound one would expect from having your head slammed against cement. The first thing I noticed about the cuts to the back of GZ’s head was the lack of bruising and in the video reenactment, though the cuts were covered with those butterfly bandages, there seems to be no significant bruising. Also, wouldn’t there have been noticeable swelling near the wounds? My initial response upon seeing the wounds was that they appeared to be scratches, certainly not life threatening as explained by GZ.
That wouldn’t be a great outcome IMO because conviction or exoneration, a trial would air out some of the racial issues going on in this country.
Agree, and I think the gigantic butterfly bandages were dramatic overkill, like a B movie where a guy walks into a courtroom in a neck brace.
kgb, you posted: “I don’t think the Zimmerman defense is contesting that he followed Martin and confronted him.”
I’m not sure what the official defense story will be, but in the interview I listened to, GZ was absolutely adamant that he was not following TM, to the point that the detectives were making fun of him. He said that he was not following, but only walking in the same direction. The detectives asked more than once, I think, whether that wasn’t the same as following. Similarly, GZ’s story is that TM came out of the blue and attacked him. My impression is that by the time of this interview (the day following the shooting, I think), GZ knew very well that it was essential to the SYG defense that he did NOT follow and did NOT confront.
Very interesting point! I fell once and skinned my knee, kind of through a pair of pants that I was wearing – so no direct skin/concrete contact. I had a large open abrasion, to the point that I was surprised that it did not scar (the doctor told me to keep it moist all the time with ointment and never let it form a scab). Surely the forces involved, my falling through the distance (2′, maybe?) from my knee to the ground, under the influence of gravity only, were much less than the forces on GZ’s head if he fell backward (5’8″, right?) as the result of a forceful punch as well as gravity. And my knee was protected by my pants.
My initial impression when I saw GZ’s injuries was that his cat had scratched him. Or maybe his wife.
I agree that a trial covered live from gavel to gavel would be better for the nation than a plea bargain, but I don’t believe that is in GZ’s best interest, assuming he can plead guilty to a lesser charge or at least get rid of the perjury charge against his wife and keep the prosecution from charging him with perjury.
Question is will the prosecution be willing to deal or is it so confident that it will win that it’s willing to lose everything except a perjury charge?
I think the case has plea bargain written all over it, but we’ll see.
No way to know what a jury will do for certain, although I like the prosecution’s chances if GZ’s blood and DNA are on TM’s cell phone.
It would be a fun trial to watch.
Scalp wounds are notorious for bleeding and I’m sure GZ played that for all it was worth. A doctor once explained to me, while he was stitching up a scalp wound I had sustained while playing a pick up game of basketball, that the skin is stretched tight across the head and the veins are very close to the surface, with a thick boney skull just underneath so that the slightest cut appears to be worse than it really is.
Absolutely true. Mr. Zimmerman should pray that no one who has ever played sports is on the jury!
now was it under the body before they turned it over? because if it was this case is over. Zimmerman states himself that Trayvon sat up after he shot him then he got on TM’s back, now the casing should where Zimmerman was according to the mechanics of his story, how does he get out from under a dying trayvon and switch places with him?
This f’ing guy…
Great post mason
Mason, you’ve mentioned plea bargain several times. At what point in the process is a plea bargain offered: before the Stand Your Ground hearing, or after the hearing? Does the prosecution offer the plea bargain or is it incumbent upon the defense to request it?
Well GZ claims he was hiding and ambushed him, so that makes it a planned altercation on the part of the cell phone wielder with the heavier cheaper ice tea can in pouch
can we try it again?
it is the vile insult of his shit-faced grin as he lies and treats us like we are idiots, of the existence of people who would be happy if a child killer went free, of the money he has collected, of the lack of justice. We need justice!
LMAO at GZ in neck brace, he probably asked the doc for one too
There is no set time or limitation on when a case can be resolved by a plea bargain. Sometimes it can happen before a case is filed, for example, someone might agree to plead guilty to a lesser charge, if the prosecution agrees to file the lesser charge, instead of a more serious charge.
Sometimes it can happen during a trial while the jury is deliberating upon its verdict.
Other times it can happen after a case has been reversed and remanded on appeal to save the parties from having to retry the case.
Most of the time, it takes place sometime before the trial is scheduled to start.
Either side can initiate the process. Usually, the prosecution initiates by making a plea offer and many times the defense agrees.
The length and extent of the negotiations depend in large part on the complexity and seriousness of the case.
In the Green River Killer case, for example, discussions went on for months before an agreement was reached.
I imagine O’Mara will want to review all of the discovery before he has any discussions about a plea because that’s what all good lawyers do.
He also has to have his client’s informed consent before any agreement can be reached.
Any agreement has to be approved by the trial judge.
Thanks for the info, Mason. Excellent post – as always! Gotta run.
TM ended up face down with his hands under his body. After the police arrived, they turned him over in order to do CPR. After the EMT pronounced him dead, they covered his body with a tarp and placed the can of iced tea, which had been in the front pouch pocket of his sweatshirt hoodie, on top of it.
The spent shell casing was recovered using a metal detector and it was under the location where the body was after the first responders had turned it over to do CPR.
thank you
I wish the detective made GZ give more specific details about that segment
PS: check this out GZ lived on the street of which he claimed he had to leave his car to look for the name and an address
Yeah, I saw that too and I doubt he was ever looking for a street name or a number. He was looking for Trayvon Martin and just making stuff up for the dispatcher.
Interesting that when he took the voice stress test, he said he knew the street name because he lived on it and he was just looking for a number.
Every time he changes something, it always benefits him.
Why it’s almost as if he’s (gasp) lying.
Yes, might be time to start playing let’s make a deal, or at least thinking about it.
O’Mara probably sees the handwriting on the wall, or will soon, but he may have a problem selling that idea to his client, who may have an unrealistic idea about his chances.
I’ve been in that situation before and it’s not easy.
And the prosecution may not be interested in a deal anymore, assuming they ever were.
Finally, let’s not forget Shellie’s perjury charge and the significant probability that the prosecution will charge George with the same charge.
What a mess.
That pretty much establishes a verbal confrontation. So, IMHO, this case will come down to:
You can’t physically attack someone and then claim you shot them in self defense because they successfully defended themselves.
Yep, an aggressor cannot claim self-defense and I believe that is why GZ keeps denying that he ever followed TM or confronted him, despite the incredibly lame excuses he gives for getting out of his vehicle and not being able to provide the dispatcher with an address to which to send the police officer.
How could the self-appointed neighborhood watch captain no know the names of the streets in his own neighborhood, including the street that he lives on and encircles the neighborhood?
Plus, his description of where the confrontation took place is around 50 feet away from where TM’s body was.
As one of the commenters on my site said, “The only true statement he made in all of his statements was at the beginning when he said he was driving.”
Why would he go to look for an address on a street where his truck was not? He’d already told the dispatcher how to find his truck, which was plainly visible upon entering the neighborhood, was it not?
Something I’ve been trying to pin down was the position of Martin’s head and feet. I’ve read somewhere that Martin’s head was toward the buildings, his feet toward the sidewalk, which would be the opposite of the position of the struggle described by Zimmerman. But I can’t pin it down.
Also I apologize about the possibly wrong information about Zimmerman’s gun being holstered behind his back. Seems from viewing the entire video that the gun was holstered on his hip, possibly towards the back of his hip. In any case, it was still impossible for Zimmerman to draw the gun while lying on his back in the manner he described in the video, and certainly not without struggling with Martin over it, as according to Zimmerman, Martin was already reaching for it, which was why he, Zimmerman, had to draw and fire it.
Fair enough. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that. I’d analogize having a cell phone for a highschooler today with possessing a knock-off Walkman for someone who grew up in my generation (I’m at a loss to come up with a good analog for the Boomer generation and older).
I do get your point. I’d somehow missed the fact that Zimmerman has tried to assert the reason he left his car had nothing to do with his 911 call. Obviously, there are holes in Zimmerman’s story … and all of that stuff is absolutely damning. Of course, the members of his defense team are *going* to attempt to shore them up somehow.
You have gone way beyond my words and created a narrative that involves an attempt at detention. There certainly isn’t any specific evidence I know of to reasonably assert such an attempt at detention is what happened (that said, I’ve not been obsessing on this and tracking every tidbit – obviously). All we know for sure is that a stressed-out Martin demanded of an (assumed) Zimmerman “Why are you following me?” … and then got a demand “What are you doing here” in return.
Assuming Zimmerman was the other party, that in itself appears to establish Martin didn’t lie in wait and jump out to start attacking Zimmerman without a word. So, IMO, you don’t need DNA on the phone to establish that. I am assuming that a competent defense is going to recognize this as well and will seek potential areas of reasonable doubt within the facts.
From the perspective of his girlfriend’s phone, having the “headset yanked out of the phone” should sound the same regardless the physical act that caused it, right? Thing is, generally speaking when a headset is yanked from a cell phone, the device will typically simply switch to using the internal speaker and microphone. I don’t know what he was using, but the call shouldn’t have dropped from that on devices I’m familiar with. Not sure it’s significant, but it is notable. Unless his device behaves in a non-standard way, either Martin intentionally hung up or something else caused the phone to terminate.
What if Zimmerman really did lose track of Martin and headed back to his car. What if, for whatever reason, Zimmerman really didn’t see or notice Martin until they happened across each other unexpectedly – from the perspective of both men – while both were aware and concerned for their safety in relation to the other based on the previous events. What if Martin freaked out and hit Zimmerman first .. with his cell phone, girlfriend still on the line? And the men proceeded to fight it out. For one thing, that might the device drop a call. If there is a factual reasonable doubt over the question if Martin struck first, that would seem to make the prosecution more difficult.
My question is how would DNA on Martin’s cellphone preclude that narrative or any number of possible other scenarios that end with Martin hitting Zimmerman with a cell phone – perhaps repeatedly – in a fight? I think your previous analysis about the specific circumstances under which the fatal shot must have been fired made a more compelling case.
You make an eloquent assertion for the requirements of law enforcement in regards to limitations on detention and such. Sounds great. But until policies like Stop and Frisk go away (or “safety checks” here in Idaho), I think you are not describing actual legal reality for those of us who must live in America. Probable cause was the joke that undermined our ideal of a warrant requirement … now even that’s a joke.
And a side note; I haven’t paid attention for years … did they do away with citizen’s arrest when I wasn’t looking? (wouldn’t surprise me). I don’t know what the laws are in Florida, but in Virginia a citizen was very much empowered to make an arrest … and even haul your ass in front of a magistrate if the local police don’t appear to take custody. Or at least that was the entire legal basis for the private security industry as of the early 90′s. Pretty sure in Maryland too. Sure, it’s frowned on in most cases between citizens – but it is a part of our legal framework in many states. Or at least it was.
Trayvon had every right to initiate violent contact (aka self defense) when GZ approach him, DO NOT LEAVE THE STALKING OUT OF THE EQUATION
Except the crime scene is not on the path back to Zimmerman’s car.
what else you got?
Except the crime scene is not on the path back to Zimmerman’s car.
This is why he needs the fight to a start at the top of the T (some 50+ feet away from the crime scene) and this is why he needs Trayvon to throw a magic “punch/shove” that pulls him south -although not quite south enough in his reenactment- instead of the pushing him north of the T (the actual consequence allowed by the laws of physics).
Preemptively this is why he needs Trayvon to appear so aggressive in his reenactment and has to add the circling of his car (in the dusk of night, which implies Trayvon a really stupid carjacker btw)bcause he is gonna need that same kid to confront him aggressively later in the script; but this is the same kid he has to have running from the cr seconds later because he had already said that to the dspatcher the day before. ( he is brave enough to circle and examine a car-high ground sanctuary BTW-that is following him but yet runs from that same car seconds later. Remember how dark it is, does that make sense to you?)
This is why he needs Trayvon to sound like a guy experienced with confrontation and gun violence and attempts to infuse that characterization into his narrative with all those corny lines-”you got a problem now”, “you gonna die tonight motherfucker”-the kid is so used to street violence that he continues to deliver his gangster talk, unfazed by a gunshot to the “torso” (where Zimmerman said he aimed).
Everyone wonders why he added all that extra stuff in, well his father did anyway, this is why and this how we know that someone else helped him come up with this nonsense. and it is all so incongruent with the evidence and the narrative of his 911 call because the people he conspired with to contrive this story were not there the night of the shooting and were left little choice by physical evidence and obviously culpable logic of GZ’s actions. (and “you got me” just simply has that a la james Cagney “old man” smell to it)
I’ll defer to your knowledge and experience of course. I do believe a trial would be better for the nation and it might give Martin’s death a little meaning anyway. One young man dead, another’s life ruined, (if convicted), and for what? So conservative politicians can stand up in front of an NRA crowd and fund raise, literally at gun point. You know, I’ve never been pro gun control because for one thing, I don’t trust the police and military to be the only ones with access to firearms but things have gotten out of hand. Used to be firearms had to be fired at a range, (in this state), and that to get them there, the firearms had to be in the trunk, separated from the ammunition. I don’t see what was wrong with that policy. A nutjob shoots up a restaurant and suddenly everybody thinks going to restaurants, bars, even churches and political rallies armed to the teeth is a good idea. Another way that money in politics is making the lives of the rest of us miserable.
I disagree with your analysis because the primary issue in the case, assuming it goes to trial, will be whether GZ told the truth when he,
(1) denied following TM at any time that evening;
(2) claimed TM appeared suddenly out of the darkness between the two rows of townhouses; and
(3) assaulted him without provocation by sucker-punching him in the nose knocking him to the ground as he was reaching into his pocket for his cell phone to call 911.
Notice that according to this scenario GZ never left the sidewalk that serves as a pedestrian cut-through linking Twin Trees Lane, where he parked and left his vehicle, with Retreat View Circle. This sidewalk runs east-west.
The other sidewalk, which runs south through the back yards between the two rows of townhouses, intersects the east-west cut-through sidewalk at a 90 degree angle forming a “T.” This intersection is approximately halfway between Twin Trees Lane and Retreat View Circle.
GZ, the volunteer neighborhood watch captain who lives in the neighborhood on Retreat View Circle, claims he got out of his vehicle on Twin Trees Lane to look for a street sign and a house number to provide the dispatcher so that the dispatcher could inform the cop where to go to meet up with him. When he could not find a street sign or a house number, he walked via the cut-through over to Retreat View Circle (the street he lives on) to see if he could find a street sign and a house number over there. When he could not find either one, he terminated his conversation with the dispatcher, turned around and started walking back to his vehicle.
He claims that just as he passed the T intersection, TM suddenly appeared out of the darkness on the intersecting sidewalk a few feet south of the intersection and challenged him aggressively stating, “You got a problem with me, homie?”
GZ claims he said, “No.”
He says TM responded, “Well, you do now.”
At this point, GZ says he reached for his phone to call 911 and TM punched him in the nose causing him to stumble over to the intersecting sidewalk near the spot where he first saw TM and fell to the ground.
He says TM jumped on him straddling him as he lay on his back with his head partially on the concrete sidewalk and started punching him repeatedly in the head.
He said the punches felt like TM was hitting him with a brick.
He said he tried to get leverage with his elbows to sit up and as he did so, TM grabbed his head and started slamming it repeatedly into the concrete sidewalk.
He attempted to scoot underneath TM to get away from the sidewalk and as he did so, his jacket and shirt rode up on his chest exposing his holstered gun in the waistband on his right hip. Then TM said, “One of us is going to die tonight,” as TM reached for the gun.
GZ beat him to the gun, pulled it out of the holster and shot him in the torse.
TM sat up and said something like, “You got me.”
GZ got out from under him somehow. He’s not sure how. He straddles TM, who is lying face down in the grass and grabs his hands separating them so that TM’s body is in a Y-position, and he holds him down as TM continues struggling and swearing at him.
After a little while, a neighbor shows up and then the cop arrives and places him under arrest.
Unfortunately for GZ, TM’s body was approximately 50 feet south of the T-intersection and more than 30 feet south of the location where he said the struggle happened.
I believe TM’s head also was positioned toward the back of one of the townhouses that line west side of the sidewalk and his feet were toward the sidewalk. This is counter to what one would expect, if GZ were telling the truth.
Given the location of TM’s body, his cell phone that was found right next to him, and the spent casing that was found under his body, there is no question that GZ was 40 or more feet down the intersecting sidewalk from the T intersection when the struggle began.
That location is not consistent with GZ’s claim that he never followed TM and he was walking back to his vehicle minding his own business when TM suddenly jumped him at the T intersection.
GZ was one semester away from graduating with an AA degree in Criminology and he admitted that he was familiar with the law of homicide and self-defense in Florida.
Therefore, he knew or should have known that an aggressor cannot claim self-defense and avail himself of the SYG defense.
Sure looks to me like he tailored his statement to try and fit his narrative into SYG and self-defense.
Whatever the reason, he is locked into a provably false narrative for the duration of the case.
I don’t believe a prosecutor will have much trouble convincing a jury that he lied to cover-up that he searched for TM until he found him, confronted him when he did, attempted to restrain him, and TM hit him with his cell phone in self-defense disconnecting the call from his girlfriend, DeeDee.
Lying doesn’t equal murder. I feel the prosecution is going to need to do more that prove Zimmerman was mistaken in his police statement. Or even that he was intentionally not telling the truth when he made that statement. They need to prove that Zimmerman’s killing of Martin was unjustified. Being scared and making bad decisions trying to tell a narrative he thinks paints him in a good light does not, actually, prove this either way.
That aside, the entire case for Martin’s guilt you have laid out here doesn’t mention the DNA evidence we’re discussing at all. Which was kind of my point. IMO, DNA is probably not going to be the key to the Zimmerman case. I don’t really have any qualifications to have an opinion, but my feeling is that the believability of competing reconstructions of events will.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not rooting for the guy. But it does seem that your analysis has gone from dispassionate to emotionally invested. Kind of seems like you mentally fired Zimmerman over the bail thing and are giving analysis of the defense short thrift.
Not to belabor the point, but you’ve introduced a bit of dissonance in my understanding of how things work in America’s system. Is or is not citizens arrest still a part of our justice system?
Correction: Obviously I meant to type “the entire case for Zimmerman’s guilt you’ve laid out here”.
Actually, that’s just the trailer leaving out some spectacular facts and lies.
That has a lot of intent behind it.
but lying equals no self defense claim, that’s the problem, the burden is on him to provide a cogent self defense argument, so far he is not even close. We don’t have to believe him because he is the only guy left talking, especially given that the evidence contradicts him and he contradicts himself.
you can’t just kill an innocent person, under strange and culpable circumstances and because no one knows why you did it, you get to go home.
other learned estimates from rough measurements of the houses are placing him some 76 feet from the top of the T, if shown correct(and I believe it will be) it only makes it worse for GZ
if I can find the link again I will post it was on huffpo and the response section has gotten so huge that it may prove difficult to search through
If TM was talking on his cell to his GF (Girl Friend), that’s a bit inconsistent with “hiding in or behind bushes”.
Laying low generally includes silence.
Again we are asked to the low threshold for a passable excuse from Zimmerman and his defenders.
First it was from GZ in order to take the law into one’s unauthorized hands (they always get away), then it was to break the law and perjure himself (confused and mistrusting)
now it’s for murdering an innocent
“he did not kill an innocent, he was just scared and making bad decisions”
when will we simply ask this adult to take responsibility for the whole of his preventable actions and the “perhaps” unpreventable actions resulting from the preventable actions? THEY ARE NOT SEPARABLE AND THUSLY CARRY A SUMMATIVE WEIGHT IN GRAVITY, The antecedent action carried out in a premeditated moment carries the weight of the resulting unpremeditated action’s results.
Further
It is Trayvon who is deserving of a low threshold for his actions, Not Zimmerman, why?
because:
-Zimmerman is older,
-had sanctuary, where the burden of responsible thinking is much higher
-was the only one armed, thus the burden of responsible thinking is much higher
-had instructions not to follow from the neighborhood watch training
-had instructions not to be armed from the neighborhood watch training
over and over, every time you and your ilk try to make this case about the last 10-20 seconds of the crime, implicitly sanctioning and forgetting his irresponsible and malignant antecedent behavior, we or I will remind you of how we got to those last 10-20 seconds. That behavior matters, it matters even more than the last 20 seconds to us as a society and it is as dangerous as the last 20 seconds because it can’t be divorced from the last 20 seconds. Because it is when we are supposed to be better.
you are as irresponsible as Zimmerman every time you attempt to divorce the two, you discard the same responsibility he is trying to discard now that he is caught, except he has the decency to deny the antecedent action, namely following Trayvon while you have the gall to imply that it does not matter.
The citizen’s arrest was a part of the common law that we inherited as an English colony. Now, the criminal common law has been abandoned and all criminal laws are statutory.
Many states have statutes that permit citizen’s arrests, but generally speaking, a citizen cannot arrest a person for a felony unless the citizen witnessed the felony being committed in his presence or a police officer requested their assistance to make an arrest. Usually the citizen making the arrest will be held strictly liable to the person he arrests for any injuries sustained, if he is mistaken.
The defense is not claiming that GZ made a citizen’s arrest. It’s claiming that he did not follow or attempt to detain TM.
If there is a SYG hearing before trial without a jury, the defense will have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that GZ acted in self-defense. I think the defense is unlikely to carry its burden before Judge Lester, who has already characterized the case against GZ as “strong.”
If he denies the defense motion to dismiss under SYG, the case will go to jury trial where the prosecution will have the burden of disproving self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
You and I would likely part company at that point, if we were jurors because based on the evidence that I have recounted, which is by no means all of it, I would vote to convict and you would vote to acquit.
That would produce a hung jury; the judge would have to declare a mistrial and the case would recycle to the beginning and start over.
The presence of detectable blood containing GZ’s DNA on TM’s cellphone would establish that TM hit him with the cell phone. You appear not to believe that resolves the issue of who struck first.
I do because I do not believe a teenager talking to his girlfriend on the phone would suddenly step out of the darkness in mid conversation and attack GZ by hitting him repeatedly with the cell phone, especially when he had a larger and heavier weapon in the front pouch pocket of his sweatshirt hoodie; namely, the can of Arizona iced tea.
If that doesn’t convince you, I don’t know what will, so I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
I thought of that too but it was so relatively minor to all the other inconsistencies that I had not time to mention it, just a clusterf*** of nonsense, everywhere you look
What his supporters are saying is basically he does not have to make sense as long as you can’t prove beyond any, reasonable be damned, doubt that he is lying.
History trivia: Westley Allan Dodd was a citizen’s arrest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westley_Allan_Dodd
Unless his device behaves in a non-standard way, either Martin intentionally hung up or something else caused the phone to terminate
I remember reading somewhere that on the day of the shooting, Trayvon had spent hours on the phone with DeeDee. It is possible that his cell phone battery ran down. I also read that the police were not immediately able to use his cell phone to get information because the battery was dead, and they had to find a charger.
Hear, hear.
Your analysis explains the basis for the rule that an aggressor cannot claim self-defense.
GZ made a series of choices that fateful night based on an unsubstantiated hunch that an AA teenager was “up to no good” in his neighborhood and, after shooting him dead, he decided to lie about what he did and why he did it.
Looking at this case from TM’s perspective, I think he had an objective basis to believe that GZ was an aggressor who intended to harm him. Even though he was entitled to stand his ground and not retreat, he did retreat by running away from GZ.
To focus exclusively on that last 10-20 seconds excludes all of the objective evidence that led TM to run away from GZ. To condemn him for physically attacking GZ after GZ had pushed him to that point is manifestly unfair and wrong.
Well said, Tzar.
And I did not need a law degree to figure that out, it is common sense. Time was people who could not display such basic acumen had the decency or shame to stay out of the affairs of society, they worked church bells or something. Time was we had a name for people who shot unarmed children because they claimed they were losing the fight, we called them cowards, we put them away and got on with our lives, now they get donations, they are poster boys…where the heck am I? There’s no shame anymore, anything can pass for an argument. Asimov was right and anti-intellectualism may have reached a critical mass.
Yep.
Did you read Cmaukonen’s article today, Death by Degrees or the New Feudalism.
I will now
Strata posted a new article on why he thinks GZ got M2 and not ms
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/18513
good read
could this explain GZ’s injuries
http://www.pbase.com/recbo/image/143490215/original
George Zimmerman pistol whipping self
You can even see the gap in the two self-inflicted lines, the gap which you see corresponds to the shell ejection port! TWICE, on both the two lines. TWICE, which could not happen by falling down or anything else.
site design is lacking so here is the pic and explanation
http://i.pbase.com/o6/58/797858/1/143490215.807ogs6e.gzim_pistol_whip.png
Highest bone points are suspiciously un-bruised, while wounding is mostly dragging and puncturing by sharp points like on the pistol and not by smooth sidewalk or grass. Two lines of bruising do not conform to smooth sidewalk, but do conform and are exact signatures of the line of pistol slide interrupted by precisely the matching gap for shell ejection port–a signature repeated twice.
Non-match for sidewalk. Extensive matching for self-inflicted pistol-whipping.
Exhibit DSM 21 is GZ’s gun (see pages 104-106).
The lab swabbed the grip (DSM 21A), trigger (DSM 21B), slide (DSM 21C) and holster (DSM 21 D).
The swab from the grip (DSM 21A) tested positive for the presence of blood. DNA testing detected a mixed sample (more than one contributor).
GZ was identified as the major contributor.
TM was excluded as a source of DNA.
No blood was detected on exhibits DSM 21C (slide) and DSM 21D (holster).
The swab obtained from the trigger (DSM 21B): The data obtained could not be interpreted due to the limited nature of the results.
The swab obtained from the slide (DSM 21C: Although the results were consistent with the presence of at least one individual, the data was insufficient for inclusion purposes. No determination could be made regarding whether GZ or TM were contributors.
The swab obtained from the holster (DSM 21D): Revealed the presence of at least three individuals. GZ was identified as the major contributor. No determination could be made regarding whether TM was a contributor.
Conclusion: Since no blood was detected on the slide or the holster, your theory about a self-inflicted pistol whipping does not appear to be supported by the evidence, even though GZ was identified as the source of the blood DNA detected on the swab of the grip.
it’s not quite my theory, I saw it on that site and wanted to pass it through the scrutiny of an informed and expert eye. Looks like I made a good call.
Thanks Mason
recced. I don’t think we will ever know exactly what happened that night. However, it is telling that the great majority of shootings involving “stand your ground” in Florida involve shooting an unarmed person.