Wednesday, May 16, 2012

More Questions Than Answers: Zimmerman Shot and Killed Trayvon Martin from "Intermediate Range." How Does This Complicate His House of Lies?



You guys are a smart and interesting bunch. Perhaps, you all can help me answer a few questions about the newest information released regarding George Zimmerman's killing of Trayvon Martin.

1. U.S. News is reporting that Martin was shot and killed from "intermediate range." There are a few folks with military and police backgrounds who comment here on WARN. Could you please explain to me what distance is considered intermediate range?

Some online resources here and here offer up this criteria:
"In near-contact wounds, the muzzle is not in contact with the skin, but is very close. In this case, the powder grains do not have a chance to disperse and leave a powder tattooing. The entrance wound is surrounded by a wide zone of powder soot, and seared, blackened skin. In intermediate-range wounds, the muzzle is held away from the skin but close enough that it still produces powder tattooing." 
"In forensics there are four types of gunshot wound: Contact wound - The muzzle of the gun was applied to the skin at the time of shooting, Close Range - The muzzle of the gun was 6-8 inches away from the skin at shooting, Intermediate Range - The gun was 8 inches to 3.5 feet away, and Distant - The gun was over 3.4 feet away at the time of shooting." 
2. Does anyone else find it problematic that Zimmerman, who detectives suspected of lying and offering multiple versions of the events that fateful evening, claimed he was struggling on the ground and had to shoot Trayvon from close range because of imminent threat. Does the coroner's report complicate this version of events?

3. Where are George Zimmerman's injuries? He refused treatment at the scene. The video taken in the police department shows someone walking quite easily and without assistance, not roughed up, and certainly not with any visible signs of head trauma. Moreover, Zimmerman went to his "family doctor" for care. Suspicious? Curious? 

4. I was hit in the face with a baseball bat in elementary school. My nose was not broken, but it bled so much that it filled up several towels--I mean thick, ketchup-like, life fluid--and was swollen for several days. Is Zimmerman's diagnosis of a "closed fracture to his nose" at all believable?

5. Trayvon Martin only had one slight abrasion to a finger. If Zimmerman was pummeled by Martin, as he so claims, wouldn't his hands show some damage? Cuts, bruises? a fracture? I am not a badman by any stretch of the imagination. But on one night I had to fight for my life against an armed gunman. I got very lucky, but the shots I gave him to the jaw hurt my hands for days later. If Martin went all in as Zimmerman claims, I would have to imagine there would be visible injuries to the body even post-mortem. What am I missing here?

6. Finally, Trayvon Martin is recorded on tape screaming for mercy. If Martin is taking Zimmerman to the wood shed, why scream for help? Could it be that Zimmerman shot Martin from "intermediate range" in a fit of rage, unbalanced because of his meds, agitated, and simply killed the teen in cold blooded execution style murder?


44 comments:

Anonymous said...

All of these insights have merit but of course none of them will have substance in trial. Proveability is the real time test in trials not theories or subjective chatter.

The most important factor in this case is the death of an unarmed young man.Nothing can alter this ugly fact in a jury room.

Zimmerman as I noted will be found guilty of some lesser offenses this is the nature of reality in our country in the post racial era if Obama

sabrinabee said...

They are throwing everything out there in an effort to publicly try and exonerate Zimmerman. I no more believe that medical report from his doctor than i believe that Zimmerman mentored black kids in rough neighborhoods. I saw that video. I have more battle wounds from planting a bush than Zimmerman had on him 30 minutes after the sgooting. Zimmerman has drawn some high-profile support and there are people willing to provide whatever evidence he needs to see that he is the victor.

sledge said...

1) The ranges of intermediate and distant are variable when analyzing powder burns. They depend on the round and the barrel length.

For instance, I have two 9mm pistols. One with a 5 inch barrel and one with a 3.25 inch barrel which is more comfortable for concealed carry.

When firing the same bullet the 5" barrel burns the powder more completely and the bullet achieves a higher velocity before it leaves the barrel.

The 3.25 inch barrel doesn't allow for the round to burn all of the gunpowder before the bullet leaves the barrel. So there is a rather large flame as the bullet exits the barrel.

Two identical caliber weapons with different barrel lengths will produce vastly different powder burns at the same distance.

3) The police stated that the camera at the station garage wasn't of sufficient resolution to show discoloration or injuries on Zimmerman. From having used these types of surveillance cameras in the past I find that very believable.

5) Depending on how Martin was pummeling Zimmerman. If it was knuckle first there should be bruising and abrasion on his knuckles. If it was from the bottom of his fist there probably wouldn't be any bruising.

6) Anything is possible. Intermediate range was still close enough for Martin to grab the barrel of the weapon. We speculate this from reports that the spent casing didn't eject. While the firing pin still lined up with the indentation on the primer.

Holding the slide on a semi auto weapon when fired should have left damage to Martins hand(s).

I don't know what happened in this case. It's all speculation. I could in-vision your version taking place.

Regardless, as stated in another thread. They were both idiots. Zimmerman for initiating the entire situation.

Martin for not staying missing when Zimmerman lost sight of him. He should have hung up on his girlfriend, called 911 and told them he was being stalked by what appeared to be a whacko.

Young people tend to think that they are invincible and bullet proof. They have to be taught to avoid confrontation and conflict until it is no longer possible.

Only then to engage and defuse the situation in the most efficient manner available. No matter how bad ass and well trained someone thinks they are there is never anything certain in a conflict.

In the Zimmerman/Martin conflict, they will both end up with the same fate in the end. Zimmerman's days whether convicted or not are numbered.

If either of them had made a better decision the conflict could have been avoided. The same story happens several dozen times a day.

Tom said...

Of course if the whole "Martin hit me" thing is complete bull, then I'm still on the Trayvon Martin side unreservedly.

The question really is what happened.

sledge said...

Tom, that's exactly it where I'm concerned. I don't have a side.

From what I've learned about both of them, they are both people I would have avoided with distaste if at all possible.

One, an over zealous, self appointed, neighborhood watch cop wanna be with a daydream of being a Rambo/Dirty Harry, all wrapped up in a guy who was nothing more than a pansy.

The other, a kid who thought flashing gang signs and talking shit was cool. Which shows his head was screwed to begin with. They both obviously had had a case of the "I wanna be bad man" syndrome.

You can probably thank TV and Movies for that. Like I said, idiots.

Improbable Joe said...

I'm not an expert on forensic definitions of shooting distances, but unlike Zimmerman and most of his defenders I'm both a former Marine and I was a Marine marksmanship coach. I know my way around combat and shooting.

I'm going to say the same thing I said in response to the last post: I don't care about the details because Zimmerman instigated the entire encounter. More importantly, and I wish I'd mentioned it before because of all the stupid comments about "Martin and Zimmerman both made mistakes" (and sledge is a complete idiot)... Zimmerman went into the confrontation that he started, knowing that he could finish it with a bullet any time he wanted to. That makes it an automatically unbalanced confrontation, and puts the burden of guilt on Zimmerman.

It is also why I don't carry concealed, I open carry. I don't actually want a confrontation, unlike Zimmerman and his cowardly comrades. I'm totally happy with people avoiding starting shit with me because I have a gun showing on my hip. I also don't start trouble, because people can call the cops and say "some guy with a gun started yelling at me for no reason" and then I go to jail. I don't chase people, I just make sure that I'm safe in my bad neighborhood when I'm walking my dog or when my wife goes out to smoke. If people are loud or stupid and not on my property, I dial 911... because if I start yelling at people and I'm carrying a gun, and they get violent and I'm forced to shoot and kill the, then I just killed someone for being loud and stupid and because I can't wait for the cops. That's MY FAULT.

sledge said...

LOL Improbable Joe! I've been called an idiot and worse more times than I can count. Even on here if I remember correctly.

I agree with 90% of what you posted. (Wish I could OC but that's not likely to happen in Florida, especially now.)

We agree Zimmerman made a mistake from step one. If you don't think Martin made a mistake then you get an idiot award from me as well. I doubt either of us cares what the other thinks.

By the way, as a marine combat instructor, I'm surprised you aren't aware that in close quarters, reaching for a weapon is an iffy proposition and certainly not a position where anyone would think to themselves that they can end the thing at any time with a bullet. As a marine combat instructor, I'm sure you are aware that there are more efficient ways to end it in close quarters.

By the way, I've always been fond of Marines (the arrogant bastards). Thanks for your service.

fred c said...

็How much of the blame for this mess do y'all put on the carry laws, concealed or not, not to mention that "stand your ground" thing?

In my youth, I attended a good Tae Kwon Do school for a couple of years. The great man was teaching us use our heads, have some pride in ourselves, and yes, to hurt people, quickly and badly. But he told us that if a fight seemed imminent, and you had a chance to run away, take the run away option every time. We were amazed at this, this guy didn't seem like the run away type at all. His point though was that it was much better to accept a little embarrassment than to hurt somebody. And that was without guns.

The guns, that's the point. If a certain kind of man has a gun on him, his mental outlook changes completely. He is less likely to take a little shit from somebody, and more likely to push home his points. For completely erroneous reasons, he feels stronger, like Superman even.

These carry laws are mischief, and stand-your-ground is sheer foolishness. (And selectively applied! Look at that poor woman who only fired a warning shot, she's looking at twenty years!)

If dipshit had no pistol, he never would have had the nerve to approach the big, bad Black man. Guns in private hands do immeasurably more harm than good.

sledge said...

@ fred c

I totally disagree. I do agree with Improbable Joe here. Wearing a gun does not make most people more prone to violence. It has the exact opposite effect. They avoid violence as much as possible.

A gun can get you into trouble potentially criminally and financially lik-ity-split without even firing it if your mind isn't right. If a person's mind isn't right odds are they aren't going to be allowed to carry for long.

The only reason to carry one is to save your life when all other options are exhausted or there is no other choice.

I do agree with you that gun or no gun a person should attempt to flee rather than enter a conflict. I will and I have no qualms about it.

But God help them if the person chasing me runs faster than I do. I won't shoot them unless I have to in order to save my life. But the next time they chase me they won't be quite as fast.

Improbable Joe said...

Sledge, the reason you're being an idiot is that you're admitting that Zimmerman was wrong from the start, and refusing to accept the fact that he's therefore responsible for everything that happened after that fact. You don't get to orchestrate a series of mistakes on your part, knowing all the while that you're carrying deadly force in your pocket, and then "force an error" on the part of the other person to excuse you shooting them. You just don't get to do that. If Trayvon Martin handled the situation incorrectly, that doesn't really matter because the situation was at best a situation created entirely by Zimmerman, and at worst a trap to excuse a shooting.

Improbable Joe said...

Oh, and BTW one of the things about Marine Corps hand-to-hand that we learned in my day is that it is largely BS for most people. A lot of it only works if the other guy is cooperating, or drunk, or wounded, or you can kick him in the balls first. Most of it is confidence training, to make young Marines feel more comfortable in combat situations.

sledge said...

Ok Improbable Joe. I accept what you are saying. If you are walking down the street, armed or unarmed, and you notice a group of guys are following you and seem to be focused on you.

Do you make the decision to confront them or try to evade them? I say you evade them if at all possible. This also applies if it is only one guy.

If you avoid conflict you avoid any potential for trouble that you don't need whether you win the conflict or not.

This is why to me, for me, Martin also made a critical mistake. Zimmerman lost track of him. Have you seen those two.

There is no way that Zimmerman could have caught Martin unless Martin wanted him to, let him, or got down on his knees and crawled with his eyes closed and stopping every few feet to do a summersault.

Martin was in shape and Zimmerman was a pud. Martin could have easily gotten away if he had wanted to and avoided the whole mess which Zimmerman instituted. He could then have called the cops and reported a whacko stalker. He chose otherwise.

Oh nice try. But I've been shown a few MCMAP moves up close by some devil dogs that got a little taste of sand overseas. I especially like that twisting leg lock (I forget what they called it) that culminates with breaking the opponents neck.

You're just trying to give me a false sense of security. I like Marines, but they can sure be some sneaky bastards. :)

fred c said...

Sledge, you're being way to cavalier about the packing thing and the shooting thing. Also, from your comments it appears that you're thinking about this stuff way too much. These situations that you describe in which you might use a gun to save your life are situations that most people, including me, avoid successfully, and easily.

Sledge: "Wearing a gun does not make most people more prone to violence. It has the exact opposite effect. They avoid violence as much as possible."

Oh, you mean like the dipshit in our story herein? He was doing the opposite of avoiding. The only way he would have avoided that kid is if he wasn't packing. Then he'd have jumped all the way back.

"If a person's mind isn't right odds are they aren't going to be allowed to carry for long."

Oh, like, again, the dipshit? I'll go out on a limb here and say that his mind wasn't right, he was living some Wyatt Earp and the O.K. Corral fantasy. So who should have known? Who should have taken his gun away? He have any felonies? He been declared a danger to himself and others?

Sledge: "But God help them if the person chasing me runs faster than I do. I won't shoot them unless I have to in order to save my life. But the next time they chase me they won't be quite as fast."

How would you know that your actual life was in danger? Would you shoot someone to avoid a good curb-stomping? Would you shoot someone to avoid a mere beating? How about a good bitch-slapping? Are you going to sit through some mild physical abuse before you decide your life is in danger?

When this stuff happens it's all frenzy, it's not like sitting around the pad thinking about it during the commercials to the football game. The guns are a problem, friend, and if you're packing one you're a problem too.

CNu said...

The NYTimes has yet another large log to add to the emotional/imaginal fire.

My man Dorcas Dad calls out one of the smoothest and most powerful metaphors for privilege (private law) that I've seen in a long time.

Tom said...

So Martin's scream for help points to a theory that this could have been virtually an execution-style killing.

Theory: say Martin does punch out Zimmerman for a while, Zimmerman pulls the gun, Martin stops. Martin screams for help. Zimmerman pulls the trigger.

Trick is, how interested is the DA in looking for theories that contradict the normal racial narrative of violent Black guy.

I still care what really happened, though. I'm not getting driven into either tribe's stock narrative on this one.

Anonymous said...

I agree with sledge on Martin making a mistake, too. He could've ran away - he didn't. He could've not punched Zimmerman - he did punch him. He chose to do drugs in school instead of studying. There were a number of bad choices made by Martin.

Regarding guns being a problem in general: think about 1st amendment, freedom of speech. Speech sometimes hurts (Terry Jones, Mein Kampf) - do we prohibit it? No, we don't.

Guns hurt innocent people, but they also save lives every day and making blanket statements like "guns are bad" is silly. Should authorities ensure that a person buying a gun is not a felon, smuggler mule, nut-case, white supremacist, w/e? Yes, of course. But gun ownership as a whole is an important part of our freedoms.

If we give up guns today, we will give up speech tomorrow, and privacy the next day.

Tom said...

Anon 9:38 if all gun enthusiasts embraced the whole Bill of Rights and not just the 2nd Amendment, I'd be right there agitating with 'em. Guns are far from the scariest thing going on.

chaunceydevega said...

@Anon2.

Insert finger into mouth and induce vomiting:

"I agree with sledge on Martin making a mistake, too. He could've ran away - he didn't. He could've not punched Zimmerman - he did punch him. He chose to do drugs in school instead of studying. There were a number of bad choices made by Martin."

Funny, you never mention a grown ass man's choices to kill someone unnecessarily. Why so invested in smearing Trayvon Martin?

Confederate money son.

Trayvon could have been a weed smoking grills wearing pederast F student who stomped bunnies on Sundays for fun. The killer Zimmerman had no access to this information. What he did know was one of those black ones who always get away was in "his neighborhood." He had a hard on for guns and cops and played dirty harry. Fool should swing.

Zimmerman apologists really are of the lowest common denominator. If you represent the typical gun owner I really am afraid for our communal safety.

sledge said...

fred c

I refer you to what Improbable Joe said....

"I also don't start trouble, because people can call the cops and say "some guy with a gun started yelling at me for no reason" and then I go to jail. I don't chase people, I just make sure that I'm safe in my bad neighborhood when I'm walking my dog or when my wife goes out to smoke. If people are loud or stupid and not on my property, I dial 911... because if I start yelling at people and I'm carrying a gun, and they get violent and I'm forced to shoot and kill the, then I just killed someone for being loud and stupid"



That is exactly the way that most people who carry feel! Most people who carry avoid trouble to a far greater extent than non carriers.

You, as an educated man, are aware that there are obviously exceptions in any group. Those exceptions many times come to the attention of LE pretty quickly. It is very easy to get into trouble with a gun just carrying it.

You seem to be one of those people who get all into a twist about someone carrying a gun. If it bothers you so much and you worry about people who legally carry then perhaps you should carry one yourself.

It doesn't matter to me whether you do or not. Your life and those you are responsible for is your responsibility. No one else's. Not the police, not your legislators, not your neighbors, your's alone. You look around at the world today and then you decide. I don't care what you decided either way.

If someone slapped me I wouldn't draw my weapon on them. To me that's not life threatening. To someone else that could be an indication of more extreme actions to come. And they might be fearful of their life.

Rule of thumb. Don't slap people, especially people that you don't know. Don't start shit with people and don't let other people's words make you feel you have to respond verbally or physically. Don't get personally invested in issues that have nothing to do with you. Never, ever be a victim!

Anyone who follows that rule of thumb will avoid a lot of trouble that they don't need in their lives anyway. And still be able to maintain their own safety.

You maintain your safety any way that you want. That's your business. Stay off my ass about how I've decided to maintain mine. That's my business.

CNu said...

Don't start shit with people and don't let other people's words make you feel you have to respond verbally or physically. Don't get personally invested in issues that have nothing to do with you. Never, ever be a victim!

Anyone who follows that rule of thumb will avoid a lot of trouble that they don't need in their lives anyway. And still be able to maintain their own safety.

You maintain your safety any way that you want. That's your business. Stay off my ass about how I've decided to maintain mine. That's my business.


truer words have seldom ever been written....,

nomad said...

"Trayvon could have been a weed smoking grills wearing pederast F student who stomped bunnies on Sundays for fun. The killer Zimmerman had no access to this information. What he did know was one of those black ones who always get away was in "his neighborhood." He had a hard on for guns and cops and played dirty harry."

bears repeating

Tom said...

Sledge agree that way too many people are living in a movie out there. Teh fiction toxicity, it's scary.

ColorBind said...

@Sledge:

Thanks for making a couple of the same points I tried making earlier.

chaunceydevega said...

@Color. Be careful. Don't bring up your past behavior. I am trying a gentle intervention here because of your ocd issues. Don't make me be more robust.

nomad said...

"Trayvon could have been a weed smoking grills wearing pederast F student who stomped bunnies on Sundays for fun. The killer Zimmerman had no access to this information. What he did know was one of those black ones who always get away was in "his neighborhood." He had a hard on for guns and cops and played dirty harry."

bears repeating

How odd that this went unchallenged. Guess it's up to me.

CD, pull your pants up, take your grill out your mouth, and be a more respectable negroe….,

CNu said...

lol, Sharpton, Jackson, and the race studies contingent get issued paychecks (sometimes even $.50/word)

The jiggaboo - OTOH - gets psychically taxed to in order to underwrite these wages.

Interestingly, the jiggaboo willingly cues up to pay this tax, much as a crackhead cues up to buy rocks...,

nomad said...

Were you addressing me, oh master of double standards?

nomad said...

Hey, man. There's no real secrets on the Internet. All you've revealed is how untrustworthy you are.

Ready for another fairy tale?

Anonymous said...

You're blaming Trayvon for his death? that's funny.

When Trayvon girlfriend told him to run he got away. George pursued him and George found him. Trayvon did not confront him. He asked George, "Why are you following me?"

George said, "They always get away". George was determined that this "one" would not "get away".

ColorBind said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
CNu said...

All you've revealed is how untrustworthy you are.

I'm feeling charitable this morning mad, but it was precisely your addictive emotionality that got you set out by the curb in the first place.

nomad said...

That's your original fairy tale, CNut. Here's another:

'S'Obamage and the slithy trolls
Did scribe and bloviate the wabe.
All spastic were the asserholes
And bum raps outgrabe.

"Beware the Jiggaboo, my son,
The pants that sag with such audacity.
Cast racial slurs and have fun,
With malice and mendacity."

He took his forked pen in hand,
Long time the stereotype he fraught.
Excoriating endlessly
The haunters of his thoughts.

As he knee deep in hubris stood,
The Jiggaboo, with bling and blang,
Came crunking through the neighborhood
Throwing signs up of his gang.

CNu said...

lol, like a moth to the flame, burned by the fire, your hurt is forever, I can see your desire.

jiggaboo....,

nomad said...

@CNut
Uh huh. I think you got my message.

ColorBind said...

Chauncey you really are PATHETIC.

Why are you afraid of an honest comment showing for ten minutes on this site? Are you really that cowardly?

Go ahead, coward deleting an honest question in 5 4 3 ......

chaunceydevega said...

@Colorcrazy.

I told myself that I would not interact with you again. You are a nuisance. You beg for attention. You post ads on Craigslist looking for me. You want to be deleted--thus your repeated allusions to it.

I tried the gentle approach, i.e. ignoring you and hoping you would get the message that continually referencing your poor behavior from before would be grounds to ban you. If you just kept it moving, started a new conversation, and weren't so rude I would let you stay.

I have never banned anyone. This will, unfortunately, be the first time I am doing so. For now, I just set blogger to delete any comments from you after a certain amount of time. When I get a chance I am going to go back and delete all of your comments. Then I will ban your IP.

Find another hobby or site to troll. Did you get some loving yet? I think finding a place to put your private parts wouldn't be too hard.

Get the pun?

I am sure there are many partners for you in Pasadena, CA.

No?

Anonymous said...

I am truly troubled by CD's banning of a poster!! Since he never has before,

CD this is never a good idea for any reason all speech has utility even hate speech etc...

Pleas reconsider this is not good for WARN

chaunceydevega said...

@Anon. I understand your concern. I was troubled by having to do that. But, I have some basic rules. Cyberstalking, posting ads on Craigslist about me, and other odd behavior crosses the line. He was also a derailer and a heckler who was blogging by proxy. Dude was like that comedianne on Seinfeld who made a whole routine up about how Jerry sucked. Not gonna tolerate that here. These intertubes are a big place. Colornut can go do his own thing elsewhere.

CNu said...

Thrasher scurred cause he got put out to the curb like garbage by Cobb after hundreds of inane comments. I put him down after one or two attempts. He would absolutely HATE to have his inane jiggaboo-ological scrawlings dispatched here too.

CNu said...

Hah!!! It just now occurred to me why these emotional negroes defend pants-dragging, grill-moufing degeneracy - heaven forbid there should be any discriminating application of standards what.so.ever...,

Anonymous said...

CD,

I respect your decision despite my reservations . I find it interesting how people can post under alias and then censor others.I am guilty as well of course if I had a site I would never censor like you,Cobb and CNu...

Just sayin...

Anonymous said...

Untrue, untrue. Lies through and through,
His forked pen went spitter splash.
He stained it red but for what he had said.
The Jiggaboo kicked his ass.

"And hast thou stained the Jiggaboo?
Oh come to me, my battered boy!
Oh frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"
He chortled in his joy.

'S'Obamage and the slithy trolls
Did scribe and bloviate the wabe.
All spastic were the asserholes
And bum raps outgrabe.

chaunceydevega said...

@Anon1. Lot's of conditionals there regarding "if" you had a site. It ain't hard. Go set one up. Then you can test your own tolerance for crazy, nutty, jabbering trolls.

At a certain point I don't want someone pissing on my virtual couch and stinking up the salon. We all have different tolerance levels in that regard.

Anonymous said...

CD

Your latest post adds nothing for me to be quite candid .. I loate censorship you apparently do not ...

Moving onward,,,,