Zimmerman Prosecutor Withheld, Deleted Texts, Photos From Martin’s Phone

You are, of course, correct.

We shall see I suppose. I feel it’s difficult for people on both sides avoid projecting their desired outcomes onto the most likely outcomes here.

He had no obligation to get involved, other than whatever obligation he felt to report a possible hazard to his community. I’ll give you that much.

He could have called just the police and went home. The police would have showed up hours later since it wasn’t an emergency call. In the meantime, Trayvon has acquired all the information he needs for a residential burglary or home invasion or sexual assault and is long gone – but don’t worry, he’ll be back. And maybe he’ll bring some friends.

If the police were effective in that community, they wouldn’t HAVE a neighborhood watch.

I consider Zimmerman the poster boy for “I shoulda’ had a Surefire!” “It was a dark and stormy night when….I forgot to bring my Surefire.”

@DJ.

That’s right. The cops were probably having a Krispy Kreme. They only showed up after all the other 911 calls made indicating shots fired.

Ropingdown – your handle suggests you should know better.

And tactical lights work both ways.

@DJ – the police don’t care at all about preventing crime. The need crime, or they’ll be out of a job.

DJ -Sorry, I couldn’t get your point, though it’s probably a good one. I simply meant that Zimmerman said the person he reported was suspicious. Yet (taking Zimmerman’s statements as true, which I do until proven otherwise) he could not see well in the dark and the light rain. It would be wise to carry a good flashlight and look around continuously under such circumstances. I do carry an LED headlamp when climbs begin in darkness (which is a bit rare these days). When I carry a firearm at night I always carry a 2 x CR123. What should I have known better? Help!

Use NVGs (night vision goggles). They are passive, and bad guys can’t see them. Clip them to your helmet, not your head. You can flip them up when you don’t need them, but you still get the benefit of kevlar on your melon.

If you are going to use them, buy good ones (PVS-7/PVS-14) or equivalent. If you have to use an IR light for them to work, that’s the same as a flashlight if the other side has NVGs. Even crappy Gen 1, Gen 2 stuff will pick up that IR light.

With or without NVGs, I’ve trained to fight at night, and I’ve fought at night. So in any encounter after hours, the night is my BFF. It gives me concealment, the ability to observe, and if I need to engage I get to choose when and where. I like those tactical advantages. If it comes down to stealth vs. illumination – I choose stealth, It’s my job to know where the friendlies are.

The reason I am anti-tactical light: A bad guy can see your SureFire (or other tactical light) and if there are multiple bad guys, Bad Guy B can definitely “bust a cap” at you (if not in you) if you are busy illuminating Bad Guy A (or your wife/kid, which is why most people use lights – to be sure of their target in a dark space). I do not like taclights, for the same reason I don’t like tracers. They are a great way to ensure you draw counterfire for no significant tactical advantage.

That’s just my two bits.

Zimmerman already said he was going back to his car when Martin attacked him.

It was a leftist talking point to say he kept going, even though there was nothing to suggest that, when the 911 operator told him to go back to his car, he said okay.

Also before you cover your ass by saying he was covering his ass by claiming that, it was part of his original statement at the scene.

Maybe he can work for the Brady group after he gets out of jail.

Bad things happen when good men do nothing. George was a sheepdog. He adopted the mantra “If not I, then who?!”

You sir sound like a professional sheep who is perfectly happy to see something amiss and go about your day to let the cops take care of it. If that works for you then fine, but it sure doesn’t work for whoever is the victim of the hoodlums crime.

Cy, had this sheepdog discussion before. A dog is a wolf that has been bred to remain a puppy. I am a wolf. A predator. But a predator with a conscience. I will and have intervened on behalf of someone weaker being victomised.

But i prefer to think of myself as a thinking person. Tray was walking thru a neighberhood that he had a right to be in. Where was his victim before GZ introduced himself into the mix?

No helpless victim was in immediate danger when GZ got there. He should have reported to the cops and let them handle it.

GZ wasn’t cut out to be the hero type. When he got put into an iffy situation he made all the wrong moves and was getting b!tch slapped by a 17 yo when he ended it with a gun shot.

Bashed head? No concussion and no stitches? Your definition of “bashed” and mine are somewhat different.

He had scratches on his head. Scalp wounds bleed like hell, but they’re still scratches.

Ralph,

You obviously have not seen the photos of the “scratches” on the back of GZ’s head.

They are NOT scratches. They’re literally the taut skin of GZ’s skull that tore open from some sort of trauma, often called “cuts” in fighting sports.

Scratches don’t bleed. Cuts or tears in skin from trauma bleed like hell from the skull region.

You’re either trolling or you’re trolling.

I agree. Based on his dissension I can tell that Ralph is against the use of guns for self defense in any situation, including ones where wheelchair bound mothers are defending their wheelchair bound babies against rabid, racist, raping pit bulls with AIDS. I know cuz I’m an Obama guy.

Yes, we know BlinkyPete. It really has to suck for you that you’ll need to up your game; now that lower-case-matt and rtemplington-the-third have been blasted off the site and you’re here alone.

You keep on trolling with your bad self.

Ralph is a long time and everyday TTAGer and I don’t see him as a troll. I have reason to believe he is also a “lawyer.” So bashed in his sense may really be what a lawyer typically sees. A bashed head in my sense is a just a guy bashing another guys head in the ground, etc. Doesn’t necessarily mean concussion or stitches. Ralph and my views may differ on things like abortion and Trayvon Martin, but regardless, Ralph is a hard core pro-gunner which immediately entails my respect.

Thank you, Anonymous. And yes, I was a lawyer, but now I am blissfully retired. I am now, among other things, on TTAG’s writing staff.

And to clarify for J.K., I favor shooting anyone and everyone, even when they do not threaten me with imminent death or grievous bodily injury. Unfortunately, the laws are in disagreement with me, which makes me sad.

And GZ had scratches on his head. They stopped bleeding all on their own, and he never went to the hospital because he didn’t need to. Which is very telling for a scalp wound, because a deep one always needs some stitching.

Sorry to upset the narrative, but GZ panicked and shot someone he didn’t have to shoot. Which is why I see the Graybar Hotel in his future, probably for manslaughter.

Oh HB, I’m glad you gave up regurgitating big words from the TV on the other thread to swing by and accuse me of being inline with (in the case of matt, I don’t know the of guy) a racist, antisemetic prick simply because I think truthers are idiots.

I’m aware that Ralph isn’t a troll. I actually agree with his analysis of this case. My comment was a reference to something he said to me about being an Obama apologist, which I am not. That’s it.

Ralph,

I don’t always agree with you, but I always laugh.

matt and rtempleton are gone? And I missed it? Damn.

So, HB, what you’re saying is that disagreeing with a bunch of truthers makes me comparable to (in the case of said matt) a racist, anti-semetic prick. Gotcha. Glad we cleared that up.

BlinkyPete, Nope, you’re an apologist troll, matt was a chameleon troll*; completely different modes of operation. (*If you observed his posting history, he searched around for a while before settling on racism as the way to get a rise out of people.)

Liberty2Alpha, rtemplington got his about five days ago. lower-case-matt’s last performance was in the Tripoli-child thread from day before yesterday.

Nope, I just posses the intellectual capability to separate dislike and distrust of the government from the assumption that it’s actively involved in committing every heinous act that ever happens. It’s the same way I understand that Osama bin Laden isn’t responsible for the Holocaust, but he was still a really bad guy. I’m sorry you can’t do the same.

Also, matt didn’t suddenly just start spouting off racism; I remember him doing that as far back as I remember him being here.

DJ, I also was a Florida resident and still have a FL license and no, you can’t kill someone because you’re losing a fistfight.

But you don’t have to believe me. You’re always welcome to share a cell with Zimmerman.

If Zimmy was suckerpunched onto the ground and had a dude straddling his chest, with the wounds on his face and head (significant enough), he is gonna walk. It only takes a single smash on the ground using a dudes skull, for that dude to go lights out.
A single shot to the chest at close range was clearly required…..and appropriate. The heathen manchild should not have gone ape over a Barney Fife wannabe.

Ralph the fact that you think Zimmerman will get convicted makes me doubt you were ever an attorney. I ‘know anyone who is an attorney and who thinks so and I have a family of four attorneys, two of whom deal in criminal law.
Bothe the code and the subsequent case law make a conviction impossible in this case and we all know it. If one occurs it will be overturned in a second and we know that as well.
Zimmerman was attacked. Martin initiated the violence and escalated the violence. He was bashing Zimmerman’s head in and Zimmerman had the contusions to prove it.
The attempt by the investigators office to delete the photos is a patent obstruction as well

Help your Uncle Jack, off a horse.

Or

Uh yea nevermind…

New site: The Truth About Grammar.

C, I get your point, but it’s not so much about the grammar, it’s more about yet another misleading and inflammatory headline on TTAG. The grammar from the article was only to back up my assertion about the headline.

Yeah, he had a right to be where he was.

Ok. That makes more sense. Regardless, he was a suspicious character that beared watching. Am I defending zmmerman here? Not really. There were now winners here. Except for the companies that sold a crapload.of ccw guns in the aftermath.

No where have I ever read that the subdivision/neighborhood which TM was in when/where he was confronted and shot by GZ, is the neighborhood his father resided, which would establish that TM was not trespassing generally in a private gated community. (And as former lawyer Ralph, if you are in fact such, you should know that even if it was his dad’s neighborhood, TM was still trespassing on private property the moment he left the street and started cutting across private homeowners yards.). Nowhere have I seen that GZ was patrolling TM’s dad’s neighborhood. Everything I have read is the contrary, that TM was (as speculated by the media and his parents) cutting through that neighborhood from the store, to get to his dad’s house which was outside the neighborhood.

Citation and links to your stated facts, please.

(And since we’re talking facts…I have yet to see anyone establish a timeline that shows what time TM was in the store relative to the time of his death. I wonder, would it show he was really proceeding directly to his dad’s house or perhaps was there a lapse of time indicating he may have been up to other things? And how would that time correlate to any text messages or phone calls he made or received, and what would the substance of those texts or calls be? I won’t speculate, but I am legitimately curious. Seems odd no one has established a clear timeline in all this. Or maybe they have and I missed it.)

J in NC: I’m not doing the research for you, but both the facts as you know them, and your interpretation of them, are wrong. Have you read anything at all about this case?

“No where have I ever read that the subdivision/neighborhood [snip] is the neighborhood his father resided…”

The observation of TM by GZ, the altercation, and the shooting all happened within the bounds of The Retreat at Twin Lakes, where both GZ and TM’s father lived, and where TM was staying. He was not “trespassing generally in a private gated community.”

Furthermore, (and I LOVE that you are chastising Ralph with “you should know this”), your statement that “TM was still trespassing on private property the moment he left the street and started cutting across private homeowners yards” is completely wrong, and demonstrates your complete ignorance of how community properties work. In a community like The Retreat at Twin Lakes, even though the residents own the townhomes they live in, basically everything that is outside the external walls of their home is considered a “common area.” The events transpired behind/between the buildings, on a sidewalk and in the grass adjacent thereto, in what would be deemed a “common area,” where he had every right to be.

“Everything I have read is the contrary, that TM was (as speculated by the media and his parents) cutting through that neighborhood from the store, to get to his dad’s house which was outside the neighborhood.”

Wrong, wrong, wrong. His dad lives in The Retreat at Twin Lakes. GZ didn’t see him until he was inside The Retreat at Twin Lakes. Everything that transpired took place in The Retreat at Twin Lakes.

As I said, I’m not doing the research for you, because there is literally hundreds of pages out there to refute your inaccuracies, and if I include more than two hotlinks in one comment, I’ll get spam filtered. So engage the Googles, and look it up yourself.

To Matt in FL: (uppercase M, not trolling matt in FL)

Mea culpa. I am man enough to admit when I’m wrong. I honestly had not read the details which your provided. And even my quick google searches, didn’t turn up specific articles on the residency question of GZ relative to TM’s dad. Also did not read it was such a villa/town home complex. So thanks for setting me straight on those points.

To my second question of curiosity – have you seen a timeline of that night generated in media accounts, or otherwise? Again, seems like should be easy to establish given store cameras, cell records, etc. just haven’t seen that.

Thanks again.

I am amazed that Ralph, claiming to be an attorney says Martin had a right to be where he was. He did not, he was trespassing and that is already established. Criminal trespass or not, it is still trespass.
Gated communities have common and limited common.
accessing limited common without permission specific limited common right holders (and has fathers girlfriend was not a holder on the limited common in question) IS trespass.

Martin was probably casing for future jewelry burglary which was seems to have been his activity in the past

Aside from the fact that the case for Trayvon being a trespasser is weak, what’s your point? Florida law doesn’t say you can shoot trespassers who are not threatening you with lethal force. Regardless, if Martin was trespassing it wasn’t GZ’s property anyway.

TM’s intentions, criminal or otherwise, are pure speculation and completely irrelevant to the outcome of this case. As I’ve already said, folks on both sides of this debate seem to have a lot of trouble separating what they want to happen from what is most likely to happen.

This case would be different if Trayvon didn’t run from the neighborhood watch guy and then assault him in the back alley out of view.

I realize that there is little evidence supporting any claims to either’s innocence, but it surprises me nobody wants to look plainly at the facts that are known.

Nobody ever stole from the neighborhood their part-time (when Trayvon was on detention) parent lived in?

Because when he was a good boy he lived with mama! C’mon – that gives NO ONE insight into his family life? “You misbehave, I’m gonna send you to live with your dad. See how you like that!”

Dude, I grew up with a bunch of Trayvons, but they were all white lower class – like my family.

And if he had burglar tools at school, and it looked like he was casing houses – then he was casing houses. He didn’t have to rob one right then – that’s the advantage the criminal has. He can come back. At the time of his choosing. With friends.

If he’s a criminal the fact that mom/dad/stepmom/bigbrothers/bigsisters lived there does not change the fact that he was scoping out “easy marks” for future criminal behavior.

AND HE ASSAULTED A GUY!!! Last time I checked, a troubled home life was not an excuse for pinning a dude down and bashing his head against pavement.

Martin tried to kill Zimmerman by punching him in the nose? DJ, you must have lived a sheltered life. How nice for you.

No, Ralph, Martin tried to kill Zimmerman by bashing his head into concrete. The punch to his nose is trivial, at least compared to beating someone’s head against concrete.

A bare knuckle punch to the nose is no joke. I’ve taken a couple and at best it takes a bit to get reoriented. Take it right under the nose and you’re down.

I took a few punches to the nose in my day as well… of course back then it was ok for two dudes to sort things out after school that way.

I digress… my point is I’m still quite alive. I guess if some stranger attacked me I’d feel differently, but barring extenuating circumstances (they attacked my wife, or if I had my 15 month old with me) I don’t think I’d pop them. I figure the damage most people can do to me pales in comparison to the damage the folks in the state penn could do.

Ralph, I respect your opinion, but we’re just never going to agree on this one.

By all accounts Martin was the agressor and assaulted Zimmerman.

All accounts? Actually, there’s only Zimmerman’s account since Martin is conveniently dead.

And his account isn’t evidence?

His wounds are evident. I guess it is theoretically possible he just shot Trayvon and then broke his own nose and smashed his own head into the pavement. Unlikely but possible.

There actually was a clear witness statement by an observer who was on his deck, close to the fight, which corroborates Zimmerman’s statement. However, during what I call “the Mau Mau days” the witness recanted his statement and has refused to speak about the event. Anyone who thinks the not-so-gated community was a nice one hasn’t read the local papers for that area. It’s nice if you have nothing left to be stolen, perhaps.

The law where I live says otherwise, if the required conditions for lethal defense are met. The attacker possessing or using a weapon isn’t one of them. But if the shooter isn’t in his home or place of work and doesn’t have favorable eye-witnesses, the law might well be ignored. Punches and kicks kill just fine. With two assailants they kill fine, but faster. They’ve left many men and women brain-damaged or brain-dead. I see no reason why, hypothetically, that wasn’t Zimmerman’s fear.

I would generally agree but not always true. I read an article once about a man who shot his abusive son in law because he was beating the mans daughter alongside the road. The man fought with his son in law over a gun that him and his wife had brought and the man shot him 4 or 5 times in rapid succession with a Ruger P90 (45cal) and he died in 3 minutes. Defense said a man shouldn’t have to tolerate being beaten to death (there was no concussion or stitches)and the Jury agreed and ruled in his favor.

A man can be killed with hands and feet. Also, if you are losing the fight and he spots that you have a gun. You have no idea what he is going to do with it once he has it… what choice do you have then?

My personal opinion is anyone that decides to assault another (even without a gun) should keep this consequence in mind. If more people were acquitted for DGU against assaults then my guess is… assaults would decline.

Also, If I was on a Jury – I’d hang it to death if all the others rules against a man defending himself. My civic duty.

“Also, if you are losing the fight and he spots that you have a gun. You have no idea what he is going to do with it once he has it… what choice do you have then?”

According to Zimmerman’s statement, that is what happened. He didn’t reach for the gun, he was attempting to get away from the guy beating his head into the concrete and screaming for help. His shirt rode up during the beating on the ground and when Martin noticed it, he let go of Zimmerman’s head and reached for the gun in his waistband. They both struggled for the gun, Zimmerman had a better angle to get a hold of it, and Martin’s hands here on it when the trigger was pulled.

According to the autopsy and police reports, one shot was fired from a distance of inches, leaving a burn ring on Martin. The expended cartridge was still in the chamber when the police arrived; the gun had not cycled.

Yes, punches and kicks sometimes kill. Likewise, bullets sometimes don’t kill. That doesn’t make punches lethal or bullets non-lethal.

This is the way it goes down. A 28 year old man who should know better shot a 17 year old kid because the kid was winning the fight.

Sometimes, life just ain’t fair.

The law in Pennsylvania (and in FL, I recall) is that Zimmerman had a duty to withdraw from the fight and not escalate force…if he was party to the beginning of the fight, a willing participant. That changes, both in PA and FL if the ability to exit is blocked by the assailant or the person with whom you ‘got in a fight.’ This means (in PA specifically) that if the guy is sitting on you (or has blocked the exit) and is continuing a one-side beating, the rules change. From the early statements (and Zimmerman’s) I came to think Martin was sitting on Zimmerman and beating him up (winning, as you put it). In fear of grievous (alt. serious) bodily injury, Zimmerman had the right to escalate to lethal force. There are nice points in FL about how much of a beating you have to take, but not if he’s sitting on you and beating your head.

Ralph, Isn’t it a major bit of good sense in the law of most states that the use of lethal force is not restricted only to cases in which by-definition lethal force is being used against us? The various phrases connoting a less-than-lethal assault (grievous bodily injury, serious bodily injury, maiming) are included for exactly the reason that an old man shouldn’t have to suffer brain injury or blindness at the hands of a punk, and a citizen pulled into a fight with a thug but denied an exit shouldn’t have to suffer life-long maiming. Perhaps it is different in NYC and MA?

“The expended cartridge was still in the chamber when the police arrived; the gun had not cycled.”

I’ve heard this repeated several times, but I’ve also seen this photo: http://www.wtsp.com/images/640/360/2/assetpool/photogallery/255685/DSC_0067.jpg

Did the police eject the empty shell casing onto the ground and then photograph it there? That seems like an odd thing to do.

According to the police report I read, the cartridge was still in the chamber when they arrived.

That’s the first I’ve seen that picture. But I could easily see a cop clearing the gun and dropping it before realizing what came out of the ejection port wasn’t a fresh, unrelated round; then photographing it where it fell.

Ralph,

This is in response to your ridiculously flippant and high-handed remarks to the cogent replies below (or above): you should stop with such statements, while you still have any semblance of respect on this board. I am not sure what are your true colors here but you seem to be one very predisposed in this matter.

If you were in fact a lawyer, then I cannot fathom how you take to making such blanket statements. While certainly a jury might be less inclined to deem ones fear as “reasonable” certainly one can in fact be found to have a reasonable fear of death or severe bodily harm from a physical assault, and age of the attacker almond is not dispositive.

I know of a very recent incident here in NC, where a man walking with his wife was assaulted by a teen at a town festival, broad daylight, and beaten so badly that he died soon after in the hospital. The teen was charged with murder and convicted.

Your version of the facts and GZ actions and demeanor that night are belied by the evidence thus far – his call to 911, the witness statements.

And before you fall back to your trite and pointless statement of, “yeah, and the prosecution has a dead body and a bag of skittles” (or some variant thereof) – that dead body also tends to support at least some of GZ’s assertion of the facts of that night.

J in NC, this discussion is something of a continuation of previous threads on the same topic. In ongoing forum discussions like this, one tends to end up repeating the same arguments for new arrivals, retreading the same ground over and over, and one develops a shorthand for explaining a position without going into all the previous supporting paragraphs for it. I can assure you that Ralph has already elaborated his reasoning for the opinions he supports regarding threat of bodily harm to Zimmerman, etc. They are based on his own life experiences and were not arrived at flippantly.

If you haven’t seen that, I can understand your frustration. Ralph has a tendency to acerbic humor to begin with, and has, at times in this discussion, had a less focused aim for his words than is his usual wont. But he is arguing his points in good faith.

I adamantly disagree with his opinion about whether fear of bodily harm was reasonable for Zimmerman, but I respect his holding that opinion and the basis it was derived from.

I know, RD. Still, the report that the shot was at intermediate distance and not close up or contact doesn’t help Zimmerman. Since there were no Martin fingerprints or DNA on the gun, the whole Zimmerman narrative that there was some kind of struggle for the gun is cast in grave doubt. Don’t you agree?

That’s not the definition of “intermediate” being used here. To wit, the Forensic definitions:

Intermediate Range Definition: Hot powder grains accompany bullet to wound site & are driven into skin, leaving small red marks on skin – stippling/tattooing

Contact Range Definition: Bullet hole, muzzle burn mark & impression of firearm present; loose fit – near contact; cornea of soot may be present where weapon not placed directly against skin

Besides the autopsy report’s note of a burn ring and soot from the muzzle flash, the Orlando Florida Department of Law Enforcement tests on Martin’s shirt concluded they were “consistent with a contact shot”.

There may be some disagreement in the evidence of whether the muzzle was touching or just a few inches away. But the shot was not from several feet, and is in either way consistent with Zimmerman’s story.

“The autopsy reports note of a burn ring and soot from the muzzle flash that were consistent with a contact shot”.
Ha Ha….Zimmy walks.

Actually Ralph what you are saying is that Zimmerman is going to walk.
The forensics are not consistent with the prosecution’s claims at all. They fully support Zimmerman.
Face it, we all know this was a legal self defense shooting and that this case is political

That’s why I’d take that bet.