Trayvon Martin

JonnyPistachio

PJ_Soul wrote:

Indifference wrote:

For what it is worth the latest picture:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

Not worth too much to me.
The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.

I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?

Blockhead

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.

LOL...
Get ready I am going to post a bunch of pictures of scars and scabs, I would like for you to list how each one happed, what instrument was used, what time of day it happened, ect...

Blockhead

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?

What was the exact time frame?
It doesn't matter how bad the injury or if Martin was trying to murder him or not. What matters is if Zimmerman's fear of serious injury or death was reasonable.

JonnyPistachio

The question still remains, does the prosecution have a case with evidence that we havent seen? I would hope so. If they're just doing this to appease the public, i will be appalled (then again, it IS Florida)

I'm assuming they have some kind of evidence revolving around the fact that Zimemrman said he was near the clubhouse when he was on the phone with 911 -- then after he said he'd stop pursuing him -- Treyvon was found shot to death much further away from Zimmermans vehicle and last known position.

There must be more witnesses too (assuming), that might have initially been afraid to talk.
we'll see...I wonder how long it will take the trial to get going and get a jury -- not easy..

shadowcast

polaris_x wrote:

shadowcast wrote:

If Zimmerman aimed that gun at him there would not have been a struggle.

if you think he's gonna shoot - there might be

No he propbably would have shot him with no struggle. If he did pull the gun and aim it at him and Trayvon tackled him then I would say there would have been multiple shots fired.

JonnyPistachio

Blockhead wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?

What was the exact time frame?
It doesn't matter how bad the injury or if Martin was trying to murder him or not. What matters is if Zimmerman's fear of serious injury or death was reasonable.

I guess it couldve been an hour or up to 2-3 hours later. it was still the same night -- and there was nothing on his head to prevent further bloodflow at the police station. I agree with your statement. That's the underlying point...If Zimmerman can prove that he thinks a bump on the back of his head is considered a serious injury, he had every right to kill someone -- Crappy wording in the law.

Blockhead wrote:

Get ready I am going to post a bunch of pictures of scars and scabs, I would like for you to list how each one happed, what instrument was used, what time of day it happened, ect...

They have experts for this. And Gimme is correct, that much blood can come from a tiny scrape or a gaping wound. Heads bleed a lot.

Blockhead

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?

What was the exact time frame?
It doesn't matter how bad the injury or if Martin was trying to murder him or not. What matters is if Zimmerman's fear of serious injury or death was reasonable.

I guess it couldve been an hour or up to 2-3 hours later. it was still the same night -- and there was nothing on his head to prevent further bloodflow at the police station. I agree with your statement. That's the underlying point...If Zimmerman can prove that he thinks a bump on the back of his head is considered a serious injury, he had every right to kill someone -- Crappy wording in the law.

Blockhead wrote:

Get ready I am going to post a bunch of pictures of scars and scabs, I would like for you to list how each one happed, what instrument was used, what time of day it happened, ect...

They have experts for this. And Gimme is correct, that much blood can come from a tiny scrape or a gaping wound. Heads bleed a lot.

He has an injury from an attack, severity of an injury does not and should not matter...

shadowcast

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.

So let's just all agree that Zimmerman was getting his head slammed.

PJ_Soul

JonnyPistachio wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Indifference wrote:

For what it is worth the latest picture:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

Not worth too much to me.
The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.

I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?

Exactly! From what facts are known so far, it sounds like Trayvon was the one protecting himself, not the other way around.

PJ_Soul

Blockhead wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Indifference wrote:

For what it is worth the latest picture:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

Not worth too much to me.
The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.

Following =/= Stalking/Harrassment...
Just because someone is walking behind you does not give you the permission to attack them...
The point at which someone is following/annoying and becomes a physical threat are two different things...

It also sounds like you have a hard time of conceiving facts... WHy would zimmerman just pull the gun out and try and kill him when he just got done calling the cops and reporting what he was doing???

Really? If Trayvon felt his safety was threatened by Zimmerman because he was following him (WITH A GUN), which seems reasonable, especially since Zimmerman surely was animated and acting in an intimidating and kind of predatory way given his motives in following him, then according to Florida law, Trayvon has the right to attack Zimmerman! Aaaannnd this is why the stand your ground law is so stupid! Trayvon stands his ground and gets killed. And why would Zimmerman pull out his gun? I think because he was having a Dirty Harry moment, honestly.

polaris_x

shadowcast wrote:

No he propbably would have shot him with no struggle. If he did pull the gun and aim it at him and Trayvon tackled him then I would say there would have been multiple shots fired.

it's all really speculation ... if you're getting followed for no reason in the middle of the night ... i'd say your personal safety is compromised ... now, i'm not saying you should go and fight whoever is following you but you have to realize that they aren't looking to sell you girl scout cookies ...

JonnyPistachio

polaris_x wrote:

shadowcast wrote:

No he propbably would have shot him with no struggle. If he did pull the gun and aim it at him and Trayvon tackled him then I would say there would have been multiple shots fired.

it's all really speculation ... if you're getting followed for no reason in the middle of the night ... i'd say your personal safety is compromised ... now, i'm not saying you should go and fight whoever is following you but you have to realize that they aren't looking to sell you girl scout cookies ...

You reminded me of another important fact. Zimmerman says it himself that Treyvon ran away. So he did try to get away from him at least once.

JonnyPistachio

PJ_Soul wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Not worth too much to me.
The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.

Following =/= Stalking/Harrassment...
Just because someone is walking behind you does not give you the permission to attack them...
The point at which someone is following/annoying and becomes a physical threat are two different things...

It also sounds like you have a hard time of conceiving facts... WHy would zimmerman just pull the gun out and try and kill him when he just got done calling the cops and reporting what he was doing???

Really? If Trayvon felt his safety was threatened by Zimmerman because he was following him (WITH A GUN), which seems reasonable, especially since Zimmerman surely was animated and acting in an intimidating and kind of predatory way given his motives in following him, then according to Florida law, Trayvon has the right to attack Zimmerman! Aaaannnd this is why the stand your ground law is so stupid! Trayvon stands his ground and gets killed. And why would Zimmerman pull out his gun? I think because he was having a Dirty Harry moment, honestly.

I agree PJ soul -- That law could actually work in favor of Treyvon too. These are all "ifs" of course...but if treyvon got a glimpse of a gun and a person was following him...AND he tried to run away once...maybe he thought he was about to be the victim of severe bodily injury. Its a fucked up case, and anything could happen at this point.

PJ_Soul

JonnyPistachio wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

shadowcast wrote:

No he propbably would have shot him with no struggle. If he did pull the gun and aim it at him and Trayvon tackled him then I would say there would have been multiple shots fired.

it's all really speculation ... if you're getting followed for no reason in the middle of the night ... i'd say your personal safety is compromised ... now, i'm not saying you should go and fight whoever is following you but you have to realize that they aren't looking to sell you girl scout cookies ...

You reminded me of another important fact. Zimmerman says it himself that Treyvon ran away. So he did try to get away from him at least once.

Could be that Zimmerman tried to hold Trayvon physically until cops arrived or something, and then Trayvon fought back and got shot. I dunno, but in any case, I really think that Zimmerman is guilty of at least manslaughter going off of the facts being presented in court that I know about.

Monster Rain

shadowcast wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.

So let's just all agree that Zimmerman was getting his head slammed.

Absolutely, and when your head is being slammed against the ground (I believe he said it was being hit against a sidewalk, but someone please correct me if that's wrong) you don't just worry about how much you might bleed, you have to worry about a serious brain injury, fractured skull, and things like that. One blow to the head can put your life in danger if it's hard enough. Look back at the attack on Brian Stow and the Dodgers/Giants game last year. He hit his head on the pavement of the parking lot and wound up in a coma and barely survived. The picture doesn't prove Zimmerman's account of the incident is 100% true, but it does prove that he told the truth about having his head hit on the ground and that's something that a lot of people were certain never happened. I'll be interested to hear what the medical examiner has to say about any injuries to Trayvon or the lack of injuries to Trayvon (aside from the bullet wound, obviously). If there were no bruises, scratches, or other signs of injury then I don't see how the prosecution can hope to win this case.

I have to wonder about ABC News and their reporting of this case. I'd really like to know when they got the video from the police station and when they got this latest picture. If they received them at the same time, then they have some serious explaining to do. It seems like things that "prove" Zimmerman's guilt are being reported first and then the "corrections" come days or weeks later. It's just odd to me since the media keeps making the same "mistakes" over and over with this story. The first report someone hears about something tends to be what they remember and believe is the truth and the media keeps reporting misleading things first rather than investigating to make sure they report the truth. The alleged racial slur that CNN later decided to analyze closer and find that it wasn't a slur at all (and the prosecutor says it wasn't a slur, too), the video that "appears to show no injuries to Zimmerman's head" (first reported by ABC, much like this latest photo that proves their first report to be false), NBC's blatant editing of the 911 call and other outlets stopping the call to make it seem like Zimmerman never responded to the dispatcher's request to not follow Martin, and the continued use of pictures of Martin from several years ago to make him appear younger and smaller (and, therefore, incapable of being a physical threat) than he was at the time of the incident are all examples of the media skewing this case for their own gain ($$$, ratings, social/political agenda). Maybe it's all just a coincidence and simply a result of sloppy journalism in an effort to be the first person with the latest breaking news, but it's just too consistent even when it involves something that's already been reported so I can't believe that that's the only thing at work here.

PJ_Soul

Monster Rain wrote:

shadowcast wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.

So let's just all agree that Zimmerman was getting his head slammed.

Absolutely, and when your head is being slammed against the ground (I believe he said it was being hit against a sidewalk, but someone please correct me if that's wrong) you don't just worry about how much you might bleed, you have to worry about a serious brain injury, fractured skull, and things like that. One blow to the head can put your life in danger if it's hard enough. Look back at the attack on Brian Stow and the Dodgers/Giants game last year. He hit his head on the pavement of the parking lot and wound up in a coma and barely survived. The picture doesn't prove Zimmerman's account of the incident is 100% true, but it does prove that he told the truth about having his head hit on the ground and that's something that a lot of people were certain never happened. I'll be interested to hear what the medical examiner has to say about any injuries to Trayvon or the lack of injuries to Trayvon (aside from the bullet wound, obviously). If there were no bruises, scratches, or other signs of injury then I don't see how the prosecution can hope to win this case.

I have to wonder about ABC News and their reporting of this case. I'd really like to know when they got the video from the police station and when they got this latest picture. If they received them at the same time, then they have some serious explaining to do. It seems like things that "prove" Zimmerman's guilt are being reported first and then the "corrections" come days or weeks later. It's just odd to me since the media keeps making the same "mistakes" over and over with this story. The first report someone hears about something tends to be what they remember and believe is the truth and the media keeps reporting misleading things first rather than investigating to make sure they report the truth. The alleged racial slur that CNN later decided to analyze closer and find that it wasn't a slur at all (and the prosecutor says it wasn't a slur, too), the video that "appears to show no injuries to Zimmerman's head" (first reported by ABC, much like this latest photo that proves their first report to be false), NBC's blatant editing of the 911 call and other outlets stopping the call to make it seem like Zimmerman never responded to the dispatcher's request to not follow Martin, and the continued use of pictures of Martin from several years ago to make him appear younger and smaller (and, therefore, incapable of being a physical threat) than he was at the time of the incident are all examples of the media skewing this case for their own gain ($$$, ratings, social/political agenda). Maybe it's all just a coincidence and simply a result of sloppy journalism in an effort to be the first person with the latest breaking news, but it's just too consistent even when it involves something that's already been reported so I can't believe that that's the only thing at work here.

Pretty hard to pull out a gun while you're down on the ground getting your head banged against a sidewalk, so to me that says he pulled the gun first, and that matters. Also, just because he hit his head doesn't mean he was getting his head slammed on something. He could have just hit his head if he fell or got knocked down.

Monster Rain

PJ_Soul wrote:

Pretty hard to pull out a gun while you're down on the ground getting your head banged against a sidewalk, so to me that says he pulled the gun first, and that matters. Also, just because he hit his head doesn't mean he was getting his head slammed on something. He could have just hit his head if he fell or got knocked down.

Wouldn't he have dropped the gun when his head was slammed against the ground? It's generally hard to hold onto anything when you're having your head pounded like that. Also, there was an eyewitness who reported seeing Martin on top of Zimmerman and asaulting him, so it's not like Zimmerman just slipped and fell and then got up and fired his gun or fired while standing and then fell down.

In your scenarios, you have Zimmerman point his gun at Martin, Martin somehow tackling Zimmerman or knocking him down, and then Zimmerman fired the gun? If you're going to fire a gun in self-defense wouldn't you do it when the other person was coming at you rather than waiting fro him to hit you so he doesn't ever get a chance to take the gun away from you?

polaris_x

why did zimmerman say he didn't know how old trayvon was when in the 911 call ... he says he thinks the kid is in his late teens?

JonnyPistachio

Monster Rain wrote:

shadowcast wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.

So let's just all agree that Zimmerman was getting his head slammed.

Absolutely, and when your head is being slammed against the ground (I believe he said it was being hit against a sidewalk, but someone please correct me if that's wrong) you don't just worry about how much you might bleed, you have to worry about a serious brain injury, fractured skull, and things like that. One blow to the head can put your life in danger if it's hard enough. Look back at the attack on Brian Stow and the Dodgers/Giants game last year. He hit his head on the pavement of the parking lot and wound up in a coma and barely survived. The picture doesn't prove Zimmerman's account of the incident is 100% true, but it does prove that he told the truth about having his head hit on the ground and that's something that a lot of people were certain never happened. I'll be interested to hear what the medical examiner has to say about any injuries to Trayvon or the lack of injuries to Trayvon (aside from the bullet wound, obviously). If there were no bruises, scratches, or other signs of injury then I don't see how the prosecution can hope to win this case.

I have to wonder about ABC News and their reporting of this case. I'd really like to know when they got the video from the police station and when they got this latest picture. If they received them at the same time, then they have some serious explaining to do. It seems like things that "prove" Zimmerman's guilt are being reported first and then the "corrections" come days or weeks later. It's just odd to me since the media keeps making the same "mistakes" over and over with this story. The first report someone hears about something tends to be what they remember and believe is the truth and the media keeps reporting misleading things first rather than investigating to make sure they report the truth. The alleged racial slur that CNN later decided to analyze closer and find that it wasn't a slur at all (and the prosecutor says it wasn't a slur, too), the video that "appears to show no injuries to Zimmerman's head" (first reported by ABC, much like this latest photo that proves their first report to be false), NBC's blatant editing of the 911 call and other outlets stopping the call to make it seem like Zimmerman never responded to the dispatcher's request to not follow Martin, and the continued use of pictures of Martin from several years ago to make him appear younger and smaller (and, therefore, incapable of being a physical threat) than he was at the time of the incident are all examples of the media skewing this case for their own gain ($$$, ratings, social/political agenda). Maybe it's all just a coincidence and simply a result of sloppy journalism in an effort to be the first person with the latest breaking news, but it's just too consistent even when it involves something that's already been reported so I can't believe that that's the only thing at work here.

It doesnt prove that his head was "being slammed against the ground." He might have fallen backwards. But I'd not be surprised if he was getting his head slammed into the ground. But when you have your head slammed into the ground once, there are many ways to avoid it happening again, without a firearm. There are probably thousands of fist fights everyday where one person gets beat up.

As far as that new picture - It was taken by a person who arrived at the scene to help. its possible it wasnt released until now because that person didnt make it available. And as i said before, i'm surprised pics like this werent released earlier -- they could've helped zimmermans public safety. Im guessing the blood was wiped clean and the bleeding stopped, then he didnt require further first aid because it wasnt severe.

JonnyPistachio

polaris_x wrote:

why did zimmerman say he didn't know how old trayvon was when in the 911 call ... he says he thinks the kid is in his late teens?

Yes, he's a liar. In the last video (today in court) he said he though treyvon was close to his age, but in the police call he said teenager.