General Discussion

csziggy

(34,189 posts)

73. And the first photos at the scene show Martin's hands UNDER him

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 09:28 PM

Jun 2013

Not spread out as Zimmerman describes. These are the photos taken by one of the first residents to come out, the guy that also took pictures of Zimmerman's injuries. This is from the prosecution's opening statement. I haven't seen those pictures on the internet yet.

I've wondered from the very first if Zimmerman's injuries were gotten from his bumbling around in the dark looking for Martin. At first I doubted that he had any at all, but the scratches on the back of his head look really superficial like the kind of stuff I get when trying to move through underbrush fast. None of the photos of Zimmerman show the kind of injuries I would expect from having his head slammed repeatedly against a sidewalk as he claims.

Martin couldn't have inflicted that damage without getting at least some Zimmerman DNA on his hands or clothing - which the prosecution today said did not exist. I can't imagine beating someone severely, punching them in the face and slamming their head against a sidewalk would leave the attacker with no DNA and only one 2 cm. long defect on one finger.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

80 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Post removed [View all] Post removed Jun 2013 OP

My imagination trumps your lame facts cthulu2016 Jun 2013 #1

Bravo, nicely put! Lurks Often Jun 2013 #3

+1 krawhitham Jun 2013 #61

Stereotyping. It's why human memory is not a good standard Warpy Jun 2013 #2

"Zimmerman's disobedience of the police dispatcher. Once he exited that truck, he became a vigilante Lurks Often Jun 2013 #4

It still holds. Zimmerman was not a cop, he was a wannabe Warpy Jun 2013 #9

You are free to your opinion, but it is NOT supported by Florida law. Lurks Often Jun 2013 #14

Evidence like calling a young man with a bottle of pop and bag of candy... LanternWaste Jun 2013 #19

That is relevant evidence, although Lurks Often Jun 2013 #57

"these assholes always get away" also. I hope they play the bit where Zimmy says Trayvon is uppityperson Jun 2013 #62

Which Florida law? Zimmerman can't use Stand Your Ground as a defense. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #69

My response was to post #9 Lurks Often Jun 2013 #72

Yes, he can. (Don't be confused by waiving the pretrial hearing) cthulu2016 Jun 2013 #78

While think Zimmerman Jenoch Jun 2013 #51

There's no evidence Zimmerman followed Trayvon after the dispatcher told him he shouldn't adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #16

Besides where Trayvon bled his life on a sidewalk? Far from Zimmerman's truck? nt alphafemale Jun 2013 #21

About 150 feet from Zimmerman's truck, I believe. Nimajneb Nilknarf Jun 2013 #40

That's half a football field. Certainly Zim didn't get attacked when getting out to read a street si alphafemale Jun 2013 #48

Why'd he change his mind as to police meeting him? Tommy_Carcetti Jun 2013 #32

I would agree that it does suggest that he might have wanted to continue snooping around. Vattel Jun 2013 #59

How do you know? tblue Jun 2013 #38

But why was he following him in the first place? bravenak Jun 2013 #52

You may find Earth law different cthulu2016 Jun 2013 #7

I dont give a damn if he said fucking poopyheads. bunnies Jun 2013 #5

I think it's funny you won't type out "Fucking" but you will c**ns. nt justiceischeap Jun 2013 #6

Aww man. You caught me being racist adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #8

No, I just think in the scheme of things and context "coon" is worse than "fucking." nt justiceischeap Jun 2013 #10

+1 one_voice Jun 2013 #11

I'm glad you got that all settled in your mind honey. Starry Messenger Jun 2013 #12

+1 cali Jun 2013 #13

The defense doesn't deny Zimmerman shot a black kid adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #15

Oh, you got my point just fine sweetcheeks. Starry Messenger Jun 2013 #17

The point is, why are so many people (even some on DU) so eager to defend the guy? nomorenomore08 Jun 2013 #20

Depends on whether the unarmed 17 year old kid was beating the hell out of Zimmerman or not adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #22

Yeah. Depending on Zim's varios stories Trayvon was: alphafemale Jun 2013 #31

No DNA found on Trayvon's hands. No blood either. Starry Messenger Jun 2013 #46

How is this physically possible? tblue37 Jun 2013 #63

Perhaps physics works differently around George Zimmerman. Starry Messenger Jun 2013 #66

I think Zimmerman self-inflicted wounds when police let him go inside his house yardwork Jun 2013 #70

(I will totally eat my words if I am wrong, Starry Messenger Jun 2013 #71

I hadn't thought of that. Interesting. We'll never know. It will never be discussed. yardwork Jun 2013 #74

And the first photos at the scene show Martin's hands UNDER him csziggy Jun 2013 #73

Lots of interesting photos and a link to the autopsy report here: yardwork Jun 2013 #75

I find 17 year old kids of any color are still very fond of warm cookies. alphafemale Jun 2013 #24

Rhetorical question? Scootaloo Jun 2013 #27

Rhetorical? Yes and no. nomorenomore08 Jun 2013 #29

Heh. Brickbat Jun 2013 #18

Score! yardwork Jun 2013 #28

+1 n/t FreeState Jun 2013 #43

I'm glad our new friends can discuss other subjects snooper2 Jun 2013 #23

George Zimmerman got out of his car, armed, a very angry man. Tommy_Carcetti Jun 2013 #25

He started it. Period. Even if there was a scuffle and Martin lightly injured him. nomorenomore08 Jun 2013 #33

Would the injuries have been worse than "light" had Zimmerman not used his gun? adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #41

No. The key point is that a child is dead. yardwork Jun 2013 #45

Thank you. You made my point better than I could have. nomorenomore08 Jun 2013 #49

if the "child" being dead were the key point, the prosecution would have an easy job adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #50

The injuries would have been nonexistent tblue37 Jun 2013 #65

Zimmerman's actions were louder than words yardwork Jun 2013 #26

+1 Starry Messenger Jun 2013 #37

Not necessarily. jeff47 Jun 2013 #30

Zimmerman should be tried for first degree murder. He went looking and found. graham4anything Jun 2013 #34

"Either word is just as bad and illegal"? Nimajneb Nilknarf Jun 2013 #36

It's illegal to say "punk" or "coon"? GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #80

Anybody with working ears knows he said punk Uzair Jun 2013 #35

Maybe it's because Zimmerman had no reason to think that this unarmed teenage skittles eater was bravenak Jun 2013 #39

Why did Zimmerman call Trayvon a punk? yardwork Jun 2013 #42

It was because he was walking around in the rain. bravenak Jun 2013 #54

The candy that he ate is absolutely irrelevant adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #44

They are less dangerous than the man with a gun. bravenak Jun 2013 #53

How does eating skittles vs. not eating skittles make you less dangerous? adric mutelovic Jun 2013 #55

How does walking home with skittles and juice make you suspicious? bravenak Jun 2013 #60

With the case on JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #67

did you breathe a huge sigh of relief upon hearing that? frylock Jun 2013 #47

Actually, listen for yourself and decide what he said. Just Saying Jun 2013 #56

Psychologists should do research on the reasons why some people see "punks" that are not there. WinkyDink Jun 2013 #58

+1 JustAnotherGen Jun 2013 #68

So fucking what? Zoeisright Jun 2013 #64

I know what I heard. He muttered "coons" - it's unmistakably not "punks." leveymg Jun 2013 #76

That the prosecutor used the word "punks" does not mean that he thinks JDPriestly Jun 2013 #77

When will the prosecutor be disbarred? cthulu2016 Jun 2013 #79