<p>
</p>
<p>Not really.
GZ’s mother is hispanice and his father is white. I calls himself hispanic and thus he is hispanic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To counter the “suspect” argument, the defense played several prior calls from ZM to the police. Each time he referred to the people as “suspect”. He probably used “suspect” because it sounded more like police lingo than because of any racial bias.</p>
<p>“Not really.”</p>
<p>yes, really, race and ethnicity are two different things, and he is both. GZ’s mother is Hispanic and White also.</p>
<p>your counter of the suspect argument doesn’t counter it. he viewed TM as a suspect for no reason that has been identified.</p>
<p>Wow. Real life witnesses are a lot less articulate, and testimony is much messier than we are lead to believe when we watch TV shows and movies. :0</p>
<p>I also know that I would be a lousy witness. I know that If I didn’t write down exactly what I saw and heard immediately, my imagination would start working to fill in the blank spots. I believe it could be quite possible for me to contradict my own previous statements, particularly if I was flustered and starting to feel sweaty and confused while on the stand. I might possibly forget the exact words I said in a deposition.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not aware that the potential jurors were questioned on their opinion of the reliability of eyewitness testimony. The media focus on the results of the Innocence Project where scores of convictions based on eyewitness testimony have been overturned based on DNA could mean that a juror is skeptical of the reliability of testimony of who was seen on top. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/25/nyregion/in-new-jersey-rules-changed-on-witness-ids.html?_r=0[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/25/nyregion/in-new-jersey-rules-changed-on-witness-ids.html?_r=0</a></p>
<p>To me, that is part of why this case is so interesting. That and the fact that the self defense claims are successful as often as they are in Florida even when the defendant is already a convicted criminal.</p>
<p>Does anyone know the URL for the Medical Examiner’s Report. I’m primarily interested in how far away the shot came from, and where Gunshot Residue (GSR) was found. Thanks.</p>
<p>Here are both the EMS report on GZ and the autopsy on TM
<a href=“http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/zimmerman.fdems.report.pdf[/url]”>http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/zimmerman.fdems.report.pdf</a>
<a href=“http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/trayvon.martin.autopsy.pdf[/url]”>http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/trayvon.martin.autopsy.pdf</a></p>
<p>I found the Autopsy Report, but it’s not all that helpful. “This (bullet) wound is consistent with a wound of entrance of intermediate range.” Intermediate range? What’s that?</p>
<p>The witness saying GZ was on top was discredited. She said the bigger was one was on top. She compared their sizes from the media photos of TM as a middle school football player and a head shot of him in a hoodie. She ended saying she wasn’t sure who was on top. The other witness saw the one in the dark shirt on top. That would have been TM. She also said the she heard a boy’s voice yelling for help, and that was TM’s voice, but then admitted that she had never heard either of their voices. </p>
<p>Both witnesses said they saw one on top of the other. The wounds on GZ match his story of him on the bottom.</p>
<p>thanks NH , I’ll try to answer.
Given exactly what you asked, I’d say there’s not enough there to really decide. But of course, what you asked is NOT what the evidence in this case is, at least, not yet.
Evidence in this case is that TM neither ran away nor confronted the neighborhood watcher. Evidence here is that after being followed, TM came back and jumped GZ. That is very different than the question you asked me.
As I have said before, time will tell if the current evidence is shown to be true or not.</p>
<p>^ A very coy response indeed. </p>
<p>As others have said before, this isn’t a case about a desirable outcome but rather a legal outcome. Television shows leave us baffled at how awkwardly real trials go. LA’s finest couldn’t find OJ’s Bruno Magli shoes (maker of the bloody shoe prints) in two years. The family lawyer hired for the civil trial found a picture of OJ wearing them in a month. Such is real life trial work.</p>
<p>Given the above, I’m not optimistic that many answers will come out of the trial. That’s why my posts have been along the lines of “Is this something FL wants to happen again … encourage even?”</p>
<p>EMS assessed TM as 20 years old. Autopsy listed him at 71" tall, weight 158.</p>
<p>Using the chart below, TM was in the 75 percentile in height and weight for a 17 year old. He would have been in the 73 percentile in height for a 20 year old and in the 50 percentile (average) in weight for a 20 year old.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.rajeun.net/PDF/Growth_Chart_Boys_2_to_20.pdf[/url]”>http://www.rajeun.net/PDF/Growth_Chart_Boys_2_to_20.pdf</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are drawing a technical distinction that simply does not exist in racial relations or perception. If you look at Zimmerman’s mother, she is clearly not white. She is from Peru and even has some African heritage. Zimmerman says he is hispanic. He is not white anymore than Obama is white.</p>
<p>I think I read that the jurors have already been shown photos of TM’s body face up and face down at the scene. The EMS report indicates that some type CPR ( for want of a medical term) was attempted at the scene.</p>
<p>Wasn’t it raining/rainy? Isn’t that handling the body at the scene somewhat of a problem as far as trace anything?</p>
<p>a technical distinction?</p>
<p>sorry, that is incorrect.</p>
<p>If I read the report right, there was no exit of the bullet. Does that mean the distance was far or close or can’t tell? I know the gun was designed for close use.</p>
<p>^ It means “can’t tell.” Stippling can help determine distance. But even there standard procedure to determine distance is to test-fire the weapon at a variety of distances using the same gun and same ammunition as was used in the shooting.</p>
<p>I did find that for SOME Medical Examiners, “intermediate” means 6" to 30". That range may or may not apply for the M.E. who performed TM’s autopsy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wrong. There’s no need to go to the ER to rule out a concussion. You’d go to the ER to rule out a possible worse brain injury such as a brain bleed…</p>
<p>I get a kick out of these types of threads because on these topics the defendant is always found guilty by the posters. And most seem to be just fine with that. But when a poster steps up to the plate suggesting to let the system play out they automatically “must be a defendant lover” or something…</p>
<p>^ that’s life on CC where a certain mind set is dominant</p>
<p>thank you hops, for mentioning that last part.
Curious though, what “certain mind set” geeps is referring to…?</p>
<p>OK, so why wouldn’t GZ go to the ER to rule out a worse brain injury?</p>
<p>well in this case, the defendant did kill someone, this much we do know. funny, bc it seems like many posters are not saying let it play out but are defending the defendant and blaming the dead victim.</p>