Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He wasn't perfect but Trayvon's hijinks were not unusual and he had absolutely no record of violence or violent crime.
Whereas Zimmerman did have a history of violence: in the past he had a domestic violence restraining order on him, and had also been charged with assaulting a police officer, and resisting arrest.
But....but....but.......that's different.
They have all been the judge and jury (with Zimmerman their executioner) when it comes to a few minor incidents that Trayvon may have been involved in (none of which, as far as I know, involved law enforcement) but then claim that Zimmerman's past encounters with law enforcement are irrelevant.
What makes the parents believe that Trayvon Martin's life was even worth $1 million dollars? For all we know he would have grown up to be a deadbeat and no value to society.
There is an awful lot of negative speculation about what he may have become but none of us know - he could have gone on to do wonderful things.
NONE of us know and I find the negative assumptions about a dead teenager who never had a chance to reach his potential to be very, very sad - and particularly telling about those who have made them.
Yes, really. You're quoting the ME, who's not a forensics expert.
The FDLE analysis called it a 'contact shot.' Not that the shot being close range will change your opinion in any way.
The ME is much more qualified to determine the distance from the gun to the wound than FDLE forensics people and is in fact considered an expert. The Medical Examiner has an MD degree. They are experts in forensics pathology. FDLE forensics people are not even called "experts." Most of them have bachelors degrees and not even graduate degrees. They look ONLY at physical evidence such as clothing, etc. The Medical Examiner looks at the BODY and the actual gunshot wound. Do a search of FDLE jobs and look at the educational requirements. Generally FDLE forensics witnesses are NOT qualified as experts in court.
"PathologistA doctor who specializes in the anatomic (structural) and chemical changes that occur with diseases. These doctors function in the laboratory, examining biopsy specimens, and regulating studies performed by the hospital laboratories (blood tests, urine tests, etc). Pathologists also perform autopsies."
Trayvon was a 17 year old student who had not yet set his course in life. Contrary to what some have posted, his parents were involved in his life and did care about him. His mother transferred him from Carol City Sr to Krop Sr high school because she wanted him in a better school environment. His future was an unknown, but nothing that has been reported indicates that he was headed towards being a deadbeat.
Zimmerman, on the other hand, is an adult whose life thus far has pretty much been a shining example of 'loser' and 'deadbeat'.
The ME is much more qualified to determine the distance from the gun to the wound than FDLE forensics people and is in fact considered an expert. The Medical Examiner has an MD degree. They are experts in forensics pathology. FDLE forensics people are not even called "experts." Most of them have bachelors degrees and not even graduate degrees. They look ONLY at physical evidence such as clothing, etc. The Medical Examiner looks at the BODY and the actual gunshot wound. Do a search of FDLE jobs and look at the educational requirements. Generally FDLE forensics witnesses are NOT qualified as experts in court.
"PathologistA doctor who specializes in the anatomic (structural) and chemical changes that occur with diseases. These doctors function in the laboratory, examining biopsy specimens, and regulating studies performed by the hospital laboratories (blood tests, urine tests, etc). Pathologists also perform autopsies."
And how ironic that the ones who say the ME isn't qualified to make a judgement are the same ones who claim to know exactly what went down the night Trayvon was killed.
The questions some folks should be asking are... Would George Zimmerman be alive today had it not been for him carrying a firearm? Who attacked who? Is someone following you sufficient cause to illegally attack them? If Trayvon was afraid, why didn't he flee? Could Trayvon come over and asked GZ who he was and what he wanted rather than attack him? Do stand your ground laws allow you to defend your life after you are on your back, head bashed against the concrete, being assaulted by an attacker who may well be reaching for your gun?
If GZ had been an off duty or plain clothes law enforcement officer would anyone still be demanding that GZ defending himself against Trayvon's physical attack was murder?
This case appears to have evidence that a physical attack was occurring. I believe any and every citizen, just like any law enforcement officer, should be lawfully allowed to defend their life against such an attack especially if there is reason to believe the attacker is attempting to take your lawfully carried firearm during the attack.
The situation was tragic, but I agree with some on here. Going after money, claiming wrongful death, before the trial where all the evidence will finally be heard makes it look like the Martins are trying to profit from this tragedy. I believe that action speaks volumes about the Martins.
Personally I question if there even was wrongful death... but I would rather wait until the outcome of the trial before arguing on one side or the other.
Then again... that's just MY opinion.
Trayvon Martin is not going to be on trial. He's already dead.
Nobody knows what the Zim did after Trayvon discovered he was being followed by a fake cop, was there a verbal confrontation? Was there a pushing, shoving match? Too bad the witness is dead and can't defend himself.
Part of the problem, the police department bungled/destroyed evidence.
Forensics would be able to tell if Trayvon was shot at point blank range e.g. powder burns to clothing/skin/blood spatter on Zim, or from a distance. If Trayvon was shot at a distance, that would indicate that Trayvon was shot after the said scuffle with Zim. In other words, Zim might have been so mad, so incensed for losing the scuffle, he shot Trayvon in a fit of rage.
If Trayvon was shot point blank, Zim would have blood spatter evidence on himself and his clothing.
But the autopsy report from the Volusia County (Fla.) Medical Examiner's office reached a different conclusion based on examination of the wound itself, saying, "This wound is consistent with a wound of entrance of intermediate range."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinebar
Does anyone else find the fact that they did a toxicology test on a dead kid but not his shooter really, really disturbing?
Good point. Maybe Zim had been drinking alcohol?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Trayvon Martin is not going to be on trial. He's already dead.
His family is on trial here in the public forum for settling a wrongful death suit, isn't it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
