Zimmerman's Bloody Head

[CoolTraderDude]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Yes, the apparent lack of Martins blood on Zimmerman is problematic for him, IF the eyewitness accounts are true.
If you look closely you can see what appears to be an open wound on the back of Z's head, so it's highly unlikely would be able to create such an event such as slamming his own head into the concrete at such an angle.
There is still much forensic evidence which we have not seen. I still say that evidence will tell the tale.

I don't think that's much of an issue... People don't just gush out blood on being shot... Or maybe he did have Trayvon's blood on him and we don't know!?

I think it's more important to determine the angle and distance of the shooting.

Anyway, he now has some credibility to his self-defense theory.

 

[Epic]

Quote from Brass:

Possibly. But there still remain a few inconsistencies that need to be ironed out to get a better picture. Such as there apparently not being any of Martin's blood on Zimmerman despite Martin allegedy being on top of Zimmerman when the gun went off point blank. Also, the witness who allegedly saw the ground fight occur on grass rather than the pavement that Zimmerman alleges. Then there is the eyewitness account that the person on top got up after the gun shot. So it would appear that someone was fabricating their story. Add to that the fact that the photo of Zimmerman's bloody head was taken a reported 3 minutes after the fact. Although I am not saying he did so, it is not impossible that the defendant took some initiative in creating evidence after the fact, during a brief window of opportunity, to support his version of events. Again, I'm not suggesting he did so, but the possibility exists, and there would certainly be the motivation to do so IF any other aspect of his story was fabricated. Hopefully, a true and consistent accounting of events, whatever they may be, will come to light in due course.

It is interesting to me that anyone even mentions the "witness" who says the man on top got up after the gun shot. Have you heard the testimony? In a nutshell it sounded like this;

--It was really dark, and I was really far away. So far away, in fact, that the shot sounded more like a "pop" than a gun shot. It was so dark that I couldn't really see any movement, but it seemed like there might be a struggle. There was a pop and then it looked like the person on top stood up.--

That witness also insists that there were two shots. But we pretty much already know there was only one shot because we have the 911 call and it has been established that the gun wasn't able to recoil to load another round. But why would that witness claim two shots? If he was far enough away that the echo was not discernible from the actual shot. All of this suggest to me that I could not rely on him if I were the prosecution. No way I would put him on the stand. He would be torn to shreds by the defense.

Somehow that is supposed to be credible against the other eye witness who was close enough to claim that the man in a red sweater was on bottom. He was looking at him and yelling for help while being assaulted. The witness looked at him and said to hold on, he was calling the police. He heard the gun shot and came back out to see the one who was on top was now laying face down in the grass - apparently dead.

 

[Brass]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Yes, the apparent lack of Martins blood on Zimmerman is problematic for him, IF the eyewitness accounts are true.
If you look closely you can see what appears to be an open wound on the back of Z's head, so it's highly unlikely would be able to create such an event such as slamming his own head into the concrete at such an angle.
There is still much forensic evidence which we have not seen. I still say that evidence will tell the tale.

Again, and just for the sake of argument and nothing else, the defendant could have walked up to a building wall and slammed the back of his head against it a couple of times. Just enough to draw blood, which is rather easy to do with the scalp. Of course, he would have had to erase any traces of blood off the wall. But then, was there any blood evidence from Zimmerman's head on the concrete he alleges his head was banged against. We, on the outside, don't know. As I recall from the eyewitness account, the person on top, who got up after the gun shot, walked towards the general direction of the witness, who was inside her apartment looking out the window. Not specifically to her, but in that general direction. Towards a building.

Again, I'm not suggesting Zimmerman did any such thing. Rather, we are discussing conceivable possibilities solely for the sake of argument.

 

[CoolTraderDude]

Quote from Epic:


Somehow that is supposed to be credible against the other eye witness who was close enough to claim that the man in a red sweater was on bottom. He was looking at him and yelling for help while being assaulted. The witness looked at him and said to hold on, he was calling the police. He heard the gun shot and came back out to see the one who was on top was now laying face down in the grass - apparently dead.

Anybody know in what region of the body Trayvon was shot...? One shot and dead right after...!

Sounds like it hit vital organs right away...

 

[pspr]

$150,000 bond set for Zimmerman. That's reasonable.

I don't care for the prosecuter they used today. He's a weasle.

 

[gwb-trading]

Quote from pspr:

$150,000 bond set for Zimmerman. That's reasonable.

I don't care for the prosecuter they used today. He's a weasle.

Seems to be an appropriate bond level for this case. Zimmerman's defense attorney seems to be doing well.

 

[Epic]

Quote from CoolTraderDude:

I don't think that's much of an issue... People don't just gush out blood on being shot... Or maybe he did have Trayvon's blood on him and we don't know!?

I think it's more important to determine the angle and distance of the shooting.

Anyway, he now has some credibility to his self-defense theory.

What?!? Every time I see a gun shot in the movies at least a pint of blood gushes out of the entry wound.

Really though, the police report describes the shot as pushing Martin back but also spinning him to the side, after which he fell forward. That was the initial description of events, and it was reenacted the next day. Zimmerman described this sequence twice to the police. I didn't know that before, but it would help explain why Zimmerman wasn't covered in blood. I always argued that there is no way a 9mm is going to blow someone backward, but it certainly has enough punch to spin someone to the side.

I also read a report which claimed that Zimmerman's clothing had been retained, which would suggest that they did in fact have blood on them. If it was just grass stains, police would've just taken a picture.

 

[Epic]

Quote from CoolTraderDude:

Anybody know in what region of the body Trayvon was shot...? One shot and dead right after...!

Sounds like it hit vital organs right away...

Chest

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from Brass:

Again, and just for the sake of argument and nothing else, the defendant could have walked up to a building wall and slammed the back of his head against it a couple of times. Just enough to draw blood, which is rather easy to do with the scalp. Of course, he would have had to erase any traces of blood off the wall. But then, was there any blood evidence from Zimmerman's head on the concrete he alleges his head was banged against. We, on the outside, don't know. As I recall from the eyewitness account, the person on top, who got up after the gun shot, walked towards the general direction of the witness, who was inside her apartment looking out the window. Not specifically to her, but in that general direction. Towards a building.

Again, I'm not suggesting Zimmerman did any such thing. Rather, we are discussing conceivable possibilities solely for the sake of argument.

That would be some pretty quick thinking for such an event. That would almost fall into the category of premeditation. After a fight and a shooting I just don't see a guy thinking that quick on his feet. The blood on his head now creates enough reasonable doubt as to what happened. The prosecution will need some hard forensic evidence to counter.

 

[CoolTraderDude]

Quote from Epic:

What?!? Every time I see a gun shot in the movies at least a pint of blood gushes out of the entry wound.

Only happens if an artery/major vein is severed... Generally wounds don't bleed initially and then they sort of ooze out and drain forming a stain on clothing.

Quote from Epic:

Chest

Probably pierced lungs and heart then... Chest seems in line with someone standing on top of you...