Inconsistencies in Trayvon Martin case

soundoff (8 Responses)

1. Jennie
   

   What I found the most compelling was the "distance" Trayvon Martin was shot at. The autopsy list it as "intermediate range-straight-front to back; which measures between 8-36 inches. That indicates there was "no close contact" or possibility of fighting seconds before the gun was fired. Secondly they did not find any of Zimmermans blood or DNA on Trayvon's hands or under his fingernails. Very odd, considering the pattern of multiple scratches on Zimmermans face (which usually don't form by being punched repeatedly). Also if Trayvon was bashing his head into the ground, he would've have had to "grip" his head with both hands to do that (being that Zimmerman had no hair), in the process Trayvon would have sustained significant damage to his phalanges,of which they found none, only a 1/8 to abrasion to his left ring finger/knuckle-which follows in terms of predominant protrusion-his middle finger. It will also be crucial to determine whether or not Trayvon was right or left handed (being that he most likely would have struck Zimmerman with his predominant hand-if he even struck him at all). In watching the 711 tapes of Trayvon, its almost as if he is trying to avoid being seen from his left side. He looks out the window twice in the same direction and makes a rather swift u-turn before exiting the store as if he was trying to avoid someone. It would be interesting to note if Zimmerman was in a car outside the 711 and if trayvon noticed him following him before he entered the gated community.

   May 22, 2012 at 10:19 am |
2. Stacy
   

   Zimmerman came up behind the kid, pushed him down and the kid hit Zimmerman in self-defense. Zimmerman shot the kid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Zimmerman had the gun, the kid is dead. SIMPLE!

   May 21, 2012 at 5:12 pm |
3. Jeffrey Clark
   

   Wasn't Travyon "Standing His Ground" Why would this Zimmerman guy get the benefit of the doubt. Let me guess, his father was a member of the Legal system. If I'm confronted by an individual that was not a Policeman, not a security guard in uniform carrying a gun, I would "Stand my Ground" as well. Wake up America, racial profiling has now become the norm. Anybody can do it!

   May 20, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
4. pastor steve l harrold
   

   Hello: i want to ask a question about the : Trayvon Martin murder investigation. Has any one over locked that
   this young man may have been exercising his right to stand his ground aginst a stranger following him for
   no reason with a gun. Could he have been fighting for he life and just simlply lost the fight while standing his
   ground against a stranger . How do you think the average 15 or 16 year old would have perceived mr zimmermans
   actions . What would you do if some one you didn't know confronted you with a gun , and could not be easley
   be idenified as a law enforcement officer ? just wanted to ask . Was his life verbally threaten sending him into
   panic for his survivel ? well he certainly can't ask him .

   May 19, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
   • Richard Koch
     

     Pastor Steve please deal with the facts; for example, he was following Trayvon for no reason. There was a reason. There were recent burglaries by minority kids. It was a high crime area that had a neighborhood watch. He didn't confront Trayvon with a gun. The gun was a legally concealed weapon. Trayvon would not assault Zimmerman if the gun were pointed at him.
     GZ asked Trayvon what are you doing here. Trayvon could have responded with a reasonable answer and walked home.

     May 22, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
   • Counsel Renee
     

     This has to be the most common sense thing I have heard about this case thus far. I too have wondered where Trayvon Martins rights went as a civilian when Mr. Zimmerman chased him down. The 911 tape you can hear Mr. Zimmerman running, I would think as a kid this would be very scary. Why didn't he Mr. Zimmerman being the adult and the one who held a community position, say instead of what are you doing here, I am a part of neighborhood watch, instead Mr. Zimmerman feared based on his own thinking, and engaged Trayvon in this fearful thinking as well. So very sad.

     May 30, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
5. Wayne
   

   Just watched Anderson Cooper on latest in Zimmerman case. Here's what I think may have happened and what may happen in court.
   Zimmerman is self appointed protector of the neighborhood. He is carrying a weapon and looking for a confrontation to reveal himself as a superhero. He comes across Travon and mistakenly thinks this is someone he can intimidate. He ignores the 911 operator's instruction to stand down, but, when confronted Travon beats Zimmerman down which results in broken nose and couple of small lacerations to back of head. Travon steps away but Zimmerman's ego as well as his head is bruised. He challenges Travon again and when he turns, Zimmerman shoots him in the chest "from intermediate range".
   The self defense plea based on the stand your ground law should not stand because Zimmerman ignored the 911 instruction and was the original instigator of the unnecessary confrontation. The prosecution should be able to get some kind of conviction because there was no excuse and no need for Zimmerman to use deadly force to protect his life. A broken nose and minor scalp wounds are not life threatening. The fact that the shot was fired from intermediate range indicates that Zimmerman had room to avoid additional physical contact by Travon.
   All this being said, the court will probably dismiss the case and we may see another reaction like the one after the Rodney King acquittal. Zimmerman is at least guilty of excessive use of force, but I don't know what criminal charge that would translate into; maybe aggravated assault? What about Travon's right to stand his ground when being confronted by an unofficial, unidentified, wannabe?

   May 18, 2012 at 10:52 pm |
   • Jamal
     

     Zimmerman was undoubtedly acting in self-defense, and the only reason you side with Trayvon is because your afraid of being called a racist. The media is slanting the case and corrupting the evidence.

     May 22, 2012 at 11:34 am |