No Independent Evidence Was Presented That Trayvon Martin Was the Aggressor

Many George Zimmerman supporters declare that Trayvon Martin (“TM”) was the aggressor in the physical confrontation that led to his death.  One reason cited was the fact that GZ had “defensive” injuries”, i.e., two small abrasions on the back of his head and a bloody nose. However, if TM inflicted these “injuries” it is not evidence that he started the fight or was the aggressor.  GZ may have started the fight or provoked it.  He could have pulled his gun or took a vain swing at TM who then retaliated.

According to GZ’s own testimony, TM saw GZ watching him from his car and following him on foot. When TM supposedly confronted GZ, GZ did not identify himself but reached into his pocket? Why wouldn’t TM consider that to be a threat? How was it unreasonable for TM not to consider the possibility that GZ was reaching for a weapon? GZ’s actions, could easily be construed as aggressive and provocative?  That would make GZ the aggressor.  At that point, if TM had attacked GZ, he could have done so because of a reasonable fear that GZ would kill him or inflict great bodily injury.  How do we know that GZ did not draw his gun at that point?

TM had the same right of self-defense that GZ claimed.  He was not engaged in criminal activity and was in a place he was legally entitled to be in.  A gun can kill you. Skittles and Arizona Ice Tea cannot. However, outside of GZ’s taped interview, there was no evidence presented at the trial that TM hit GZ first or was the aggressor.  Conjecture and argument are not evidence.

One Zimmerman supporter stated the since GZ was screaming TM was the aggressor.   Even if GZ was screaming, that did not mean that TM hit him first or was the aggressor!

There was witness testimony from Goode who indicated that he may have seen TM on top of GZ.  (Note there was also testimony  from a witness who said she saw GZ on top of TM)  Goode also testified that he was not sure that TM was hitting GZ.  Even TM was hitting GZ, it was not very hard considering that all GZ had was a bloody nose and it does not indicate that TM started the fight or was the aggressor. No witness saw the beginning of the fight or who started it.   TM could simply have been “winning” the fight at that stage.   Rich Lowry, a conservative commentator stated as muchGZ was the only remaining “witness” who could offer testimony on how the fight started and who started it. Inasmuch as GZ killed TM, TM can’t testify so GZ’s credibility needs to be scrutinized, i.e., should he be believed?

In taped interviews which served as his testimony (playing these tapes was a prosecution misstep as it allowed GZ to “testify” without being cross-examined) GZ made several statements which are contradicted by common sense and the forensic evidence.  Here is the interview with Sean Hannity.

1. GZ states that TM jumped out at him from some bushes.

In his reenactment there were no bushes at the location that GZ indicated that TM jumped out at him. It is strange that TM ran from GZ then attacked him while he was on foot? If that is even true, TM could have considered GZ a threat that he could not evade and then resorted to fisticuffs in self-defense.

2. GZ claimed TM hit him 12+ times in the face so hard that his head was pounded against the pavement each time.

GZ had two small abrasions on the back of his head and a bloody nose. These were mild injuries for which he did not even him seek secondary medical treatment. Common sense tells you that his injuries would have been much more extensive if his statement had been true. He should have suffered from a LOS, concussion and/or skull fracture, and even a coma or death. His face would have suffered much more damage than a bloody nose.

savagebeating

zimmpic

The Florida crime labs could find no trace of GZ’s DNA under TM’s fingernails or on his hands which is of course contradicts GZ’s statements.  Here is the DNA report. Here is the FDLE DNA analyst’s testimony at trial.

There was also only one small cut on TM’s finger which is inconsistent with him hitting GZ so hard and so many times.   The attorney he retained to represent him in his domestic violence case, Jayne Weintraub, pointed out that inconsistency when she stated that Zimmerman’s story was not true

3. GZ claimed that TM saw his gun and grabbed for it and he had to wrestle it away from TM in order to shoot him.

The Florida crime lab was unable to find any of TM’s DNA or fingerprints on the GZ’s gun.

How could TM see GZ’s gun when it was dark and the gun was in a holster on GZ’s back?

4. GZ claimed that TM’s had his hand over his mouth and held him down, yet he was the one screaming.

The Florida crime lab was unable to find any of GZ’s DNA on TM’s hands or under his fingernails.   Why was there no blood on TM’s hands from Zimmerman’s bloody nose?

How could GZ scream when TM’s hand was over his mouth. How could TM reach for GZ’s gun, cover his mouth, and hold him down with only two hands?

5.  Though I don’t believe it was presented at trial, GZ claimed TM pinned him on the concrete and yard as he pummeled him and that he fought off TM and managed to hold TM’s wrists to get his gun out of the holster.

Some GZ supporters claim that the law of self-defense states that only the mindset of the person pleading self-defense is important.  If this was true, any paranoid person would be able to justify shooting someone for no reason other than their own delusions.

The law, in and of itself, cannot prove that GZ acted in self-defense.  The issue is not one of law, but of fact!  The law states that, in so many words, a valid affirmative defense of self-defense, requires that the “shooter” have a reasonable belief that he would suffer imminent death or great bodily injury. The issue of whether GZ had a reasonable belief is one of fact, not law!

If you ignore (or at the very least discount) each of GZ’s statements (1-5 above) which are not supported by the forensic evidence (in fact, in some cases, they are contradicted by it) then, there is no basis for GZ to have had a reasonable fear of death of bodily injury.

He was just engaged in a fist fight. He had already called the police and they would arrive any minute and the fight would have been over then.  The George Zimmerman Trial For Dummies, by Dr. Kristine Randall, July 10, 2013

How could he claim that he had a reasonable belief that he would suffer imminent death or great bodily injury when he voluntarily left his car and pursued TM? I submit that he felt safe because he was armed.

IMHO, GZ had no reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury.  That would have given him motive to lie about TM’s actions in order to conjure a situation where such a fear could be construed as reasonable.

Ironically, enough, the right wing bloggers, commentators and tweeters have demonized Trayvon in order to justify believing GZ’s story. Calling him a thug, etc. Arguendo, even if he was a thug, he was not engaged in criminal activity that night and was armed with only Skittles and Arizona Ice Tea. GZ cannot retroactively justify killing TM, even if he turned out to be a thug and there is no indication he was anything but a troubled teen.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in George Zimmerman, Gun control, profiling, racism, Stand Your Groud, Trayvon Martin and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to No Independent Evidence Was Presented That Trayvon Martin Was the Aggressor

    • Did Rachel Jeantel testify at trial that TM attacked GZ and hit him first? I don’t think so, but show me a link to that testimony if it exists. What she told the Huffington Post she “thinks” happened is not evidence presented at trial. Moreover, she was not at the scene of the killing. She was on the phone, and not an eyewitness to what actually happened. Additionally, she testified that TM was concerned about an unidentified stranger who was following him. Then GZ got out of his car and followed TM on foot, then when there was confrontation (according to GZ’s videotaped statement) TM asked him why he was following him, he (GZ) did not identify himself and reached into his pocket. How would TM not know that GZ was reaching for a gun or other weapon? At that point, GZ’s actions were aggressive or could be construed as aggressive by a reasonable person, and if he ht GZ at that point, he was not the aggressor, GZ was. However, that’s just conjecture and there was no witness who could say who attacked who and when or why. As I stated, there was no evidence offered at trial to show that TM was the aggressor.

      Like

    • You have produced just a picture and there is no indication where it is in the reenactment. There are several news accounts saying that where GZ said TM jumped out at him there were no bushes. Whether GZ “lied” about the bushes or not, does not affect that fact that there was no evidence presented that TM was the aggressor outside of GZ’s story or that GZ’s story defies common sense and is not supported by any forensic evidence. There is no evidence at all that TM hit GZ 12-25 times in the face hard enough to slam his head on the pavement or reached for his gun in the dark.

      Like

    • I will quote from the article you cite:

      “Jeantel expounded on her thoughts on what occurred when Zimmerman and Martin met face to face. “I believe Trayvon hit first,” she said. She went on to describe how she believed that Trayvon throwing the first punch was likely caused by Zimmerman attempting to grab and detain Martin.

      While it is impossible to confirm Jeantel’s speculation, this revelation coincides with the testimony she gave during the Zimmerman trial. On the stand, Jeantel indicated that she could hear Martin saying “get off, get off” before the phone call they were on disconnected. It also expands upon the account she gave earlier this week, during an interview on CNN’s “Piers Morgan Tonight.” The 19-year-old described to Morgan how she told Martin that Zimmerman might be a “pervert” or “rapist.” She believed that Martin’s fear led him to flee the older man, but not head straight to the home where he had been staying because the 12-year-old son of his father’s fiancee was there.

      Ultimately, Zimmerman is the only person who knows exactly what happened in the seconds before he shot and killed Martin”

      She states that she thinks Travyon threw the first punch because GZ grabbed him. Grabbing TM would be an aggressive act and would make GZ the aggressor. Under that scenario, TM’s hitting GZ would be realiation.

      Like

  1. wrong! trayvon martin family attorney daryl parks openly admits TM attacked zimmerman, bashed his head on the sidewalk, and tried to cover zimmermans nose and mouth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTFeXl1v7eU

    Like

    • Daryl Parks did not testify or offer evidence at the trial which is what I’m talking about. He was not at the scene of the murder and TM did not talk to him after the murder (He obviously talked to now one) so there is no way Parks would know what happened. There was no evidence that GZ’s DNA was on TM or under his fingernails, so how could he cover GZ’s nose and mouth and not get blood or DNA on himself. GZ had 2 small abrasions on the back of his head and a bloody nose yet it is to be believed that TM hit him so hard 12-25 times that his head was slammed on the pavement. That doesn’t make sense and the forensic evidence does not support such an occurrence.

      Like

  2. roderick2012 says:

    The State threw the case.

    There was so much evidence both scientifically provable like the misalignment of the bullet holes in the hoodie and undershirt when compared to the entry wound and little things like Trayvon’s phone was on the ground that the State didn’t even tackle.

    IIRC they State didn’t ask Dr. Bao about the trajectory of the bullet which if it had been explained with diagrams would have given the State at least a shot at manslaughter.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s