8 Minutes To Treat Zimmerman: "He wasn't injured that bad."

[kpete]

8 Minutes To Treat Zimmerman: "He wasn't injured that bad."

CNN constructed a video timeline of the night Trayvon Martin was killed by Zimmerman. This timeline shows that medical personnel only had around 8 minutes to treat Zimmerman, and thus his injuries could not have been serious:

...........................

The first officer arrived at the scene at 7:17 pm. The officer observed Zimmerman "bleeding from the nose and back of his head," according to the police report.

Law enforcement expert Alex Manning says you have around 2 minutes when not sure what happened. Looks like you have a window of perhaps 1-2 minutes for any confrontation because Trayvon's girlfriend heard Zimmerman ask Trayvon "What you doing around here?" before her phone call went dead at 7:16. At 7:30, a paramedic pronounces that Trayvon is dead.

Then Zimmerman is given first aid in the back seat of police car, but it is a matter of dispute as to when that happened. It is unknown at what time the paramedics arrived at the scene, how many paramedics were present, and whether paramedics treated Zimmerman and Trayvon at the same time. The police arrived at the station with Zimmerman at 7:52 pm, or 35 minutes after the first officer arrived at the crime scene. The "police station is a 15 minute drive away."

Manning says this timeline reveals to her that there was "little, if any, medical attention given to George Zimmerman. If the paramedics were with Trayvon Martin until 7:30 when they pronounced him dead," then the paramedics had around 8 minutes to do an assessment and give any medical treatment to Zimmerman between 7:30-7:38. She concluded: "He wasn't injured that bad."

.........................

Video & more:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/02/1080134/-8-Minutes-To-Treat-Zimmerman-He-wasn-t-injured-that-bad-

[Johnson20]

1. And the point is?

Seems to me if he was injured at all then the how, why and when of those injuries must be addressed by the investigators. The extent of the injuries will matter little in this.

[malaise]

2. Not really - he was the stalker

Poor Trayvon must have had to stand his ground and without a gun like his stalker

[yardwork]

4. Let's investigate the injuries to Trayvon, too. How, why, and when.

Sounds like there needs to be an investigation.

[Johnson20]

7. Are you maintaining

that neither local, state or federal (FBI & DOJ) investigators are investigating his injuries?

[yardwork]

9. They weren't, until the media outcry forced them to do so.

When I started reading about this case several weeks ago the local police department said that they had completed their investigation and found no evidence indicating that Zimmerman had acted in anything but self defense. They were preparing to close the case.

Fortunately, Trayvon's family could afford to hire an attorney, who stubbornly kept holding press conferences until the national news media noticed. Only after that did the state and feds step in. Only then did the police chief step down and the state's attorney recuse himself from the case.

I hope that Trayvon Martin received a competent and fair autopsy and that the results of that autopsy will be revealed. We certainly would never have seen the results if not for this media outcry.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. It would be in the autopsy report, which the State Attorney is still sitting on

We have what the mortician observed as well.

[Life Long Dem]

6. The only thing that matters about the injuries are the extent of the injuries.

The question will be, did Zimmerman feel his life was threatened in order to use deadly force.

[Johnson20]

8. Are you saying

that a person must obtain substantial injuries before they can claim that they felt that their life was in danger? Interesting

[Life Long Dem]

10. Are you saying someone can kill you over a scratch?

[Johnson20]

18. Folks you may want to ask

some women, elderly or handicapped if this holds true for them, eg must be injured before they feel their life is being threatened

[K Gardner]

26. Its obvious you're trying your best to stick up for Zimmy here, but he was not a woman, not

elderly, OR handicapped (except with his obvious paranoia over black males). I'm sure Zimmerman felt his "life was threatened" the minute he SPIED Trayvon (from the safety of his car) walking home with a bag of Skittles.

None of your "points" on this thread make any sense. At all. Mission not accomplished.

[Johnson20]

29. I am trying

to stick up for all of our basic rights.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. When he was told by dispatch after he told them he was following

"Ok, we don't need you to do that" by following he escalated the situation.

There is more, it's stand your ground, not walk your ground.

[dionysus]

56. delete

[Johnson20]

20. I'm saying it is very, very situational plus

I'm saying there need not be any physical injury before you can claim self defense and use deadly force and I think the law and courts will bear me out on this.

[maddezmom]

11. here is what I'm saying

he called police, they were on their way, he should have stayed in his car and no one would have been injured or killed, not even George.

[obamanut2012]

17. Or a passerby

In any gun safety class, and especially in a CCW permit class, you have a LEGAL OBLIGATION TO NOT HURT OR ENDANGER PASSERBYS IN ANYWAY. Cops also have this LEGAL obligation. For a non LEO, brandishing in any way is a felony. Firing around residences, especially closely-grouped townhomes, is a felony, unless YOU are the one who is being attacked. Not the aggressor who had his prey try to defend themselves. Only luck kept GZ from hitting the boy walking his Boxer puppy, or going through a window and shooting someone in their home.

Some of us here are good liberals who are also educated and safe gun owners, who are also aware of the laws and our obligations. What Zimmerman did breaks so many laws and so many safety concerns it isn't even funny.

Lifting your shirt and showing your gun to someone is a felony, even in red states. He did much more than that.

[Johnson20]

21. No sir you are way off base here

There is no way any of those principals apply in a case of self defense (assuming this was one).

[K Gardner]

27. This wasn't a case of self-defense. n/t

[Johnson20]

31. You know that for sure do you?

Then why aren't you going down there to appear before the Grand Jury and let them have your testimony?? Or are you really just speculating or have a gut feeling. Lots of innocent folks have probably been hanged by people with gut feelings. Is that what we want here?

[K Gardner]

39. You're not looking at evidence already out there. However, it does look like

zimmerman's defenders have backed away from the camera, so maybe you could step up for him.

Basic rights, and all that, which Trayvon doesn't have any longer.

[Johnson20]

19. That sir, is not what is at issue here in this thread.

My question is must you sustain great injury before you can claim you life was being threatened. If your answerer is yes then that will probably surprise a lot of women, elderly, physically small and handicapped people.

[maddezmom]

22. that may be your question but it's not mine. Mine is why didn't he stay in his car?

and if he did there would be no need for your question. FTR, it's ma'am.

[Johnson20]

24. Yes and I completly agree with you! So there :)

[Bonduel]

33. Agree 100%

I could really care less about his injuries and don't think it should be the focus. It seems to me that people who are arguing the extent of the injuries would accept the self defense argument if the injuries are shown to be extensive. WHO CARES! He shouldn't have been following him. End of story. He went after Trayvon. end of story

[Johnson20]

37. Yes maybe! We Will see in the end I hope

[yardwork]

13. So it would have been ok if Trayvon had shot Zimmerman dead?

After all, Trayvon was more likely to feel that his life was in danger. According to SYG, Trayvon would have been well within his rights to defend himself in any way possible.

[Johnson20]

25. Yes, if the situation were different

and it could be shown that Trayvon was in fear of his life or great bodily harm. I repeat yes! Thats the whole purpose of self-defense law isn't it?

[yardwork]

43. If the situation were different? How so?

Based on what we know, Trayvon had reason to be in fear of his life. Zimmerman admits to chasing him on the 911 call tape. And Trayvon was shot by Zimmerman - Zimmerman acknowledges this.

Trayvon was only 17 so he wasn't allowed to be carrying a concealed weapon. If he were 18 he could have done so legally. You can't tell me that everybody would be defending Trayvon if he had been the one to shoot and kill Zimmerman. This case would be playing out very differently.

[dkf]

49. If Trayvon had grabbed Zimmerman's gun and Zimmerman landed up dead then he probably could have

used SYG.

In a fight it seems probable that if one person feels their life is in danger than the other does also.

[Johnson20]

52. Thanks for the help dkf. I was getting tired

and exasperated.

[obamanut2012]

16. Basically yes, that's what the law states

You have to be protecting yourself from death or grievous bodily harm. Being the aggressor with the gun means you better be able to show someone tried to run you over in a car or came at you with a machete.

I live in a purple state and own several guns and hold a CCW permit, so I am an educated gun owner and not a
Second Amendment Hater."

[Johnson20]

32. Yes I agree with you

and have been legally carrying a gun and studying and instructing on the law and principles of self-defense for over 40 years myself. So don't try to pass off that stuff about banishing and firing near structures on me, I know better. Moreover laws vary markedly from state to state and you should know that.

[EOTE]

23. Are you saying that you can stalk a person for several minutes with a gun.

Then intimidate them, and when they finally begin to fight back, you can shoot them? That's a really fucked up moral compass you've got there.

[Johnson20]

28. No that is not at all what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that anyone, anyone has the right to defend themselves from death or grievous bodily harm. We are only speculating as to what lead up to that event and if you know different then way the hell are you not appearing before the Grand Jury

[EOTE]

30. Yeah, and just how the fuck do you think this man with a gun and an additional 100lbs.

was defending himself from death or grievous bodily harm?

Also, if there was a conflict in which Zimmerman found himself risking death or grievous bodily harm, he's the stupid fuck who started it.

Either way, Zimmerman is a murderous piece of shit. He needs to be locked up immediately.

[jsmirman]

48. (HE'S A LIAR) I'm saying if you lie about your injuries

there's an extremely good chance that

YOU'RE A LIAR

and, you know, things like, well, LYING, undermine the entire credibility of your story.

He made a terrible decision when he claimed he had a bloody nose.

Pretty much nothing bleeds like a person's nose.

It's just not physically possible to show no signs of damage to your eyes/nose/under your eyes that soon after a bloody nose. Which DOES shoot his entire story to shit.

[jwirr]

34. When you are the stalker does that question apply? I don't think so.

[Cosmocat]

12. This is the lunatic right doing what it does best

driving the debate from the simple FACTS to some tangent that is not really what the issue is about.

The issue is that some nutjob followed some kid minding his own business around, drove a conflict and ended up killing the kid.

Anything beyond that, Martin being suspended from school, what happened once a complete stranger walked to Martin and confronted him, all that has nothing to do with the fact that this moron killed Martin and should be charged for it.

[uponit7771]

3. There was no blood on the T-shity, we can't argue with that fact

[randr]

5. Self inflicted wounds?-nc

[Ganja Ninja]

15. I don't think Zimmerman's injuries are going to be a factor in this.

I think it will all hinge on the trajectory of the bullet and how close and what position Trayvon's body was when he was shot.
If the bullet hit him in the back and Trayvon was in a standing position it would indicate he was trying to get away from Zimmerman when the gun was fired. Also if Trayvon was more than a step or two away it's even worse for Zimmerman. If Trayvon was attempting to flee or even just backing off then Zimmerman has no self defense claim even if there was a struggle moments before.

Then again they may just throw out Zimmerman's claim altogether since he was the armed aggressor and Trayvon was only defending himself. After all it was Zimmerman that was armed. It was Zimmerman that first followed and then confronted Trayvon, something he had no authority to do. Because of Zimmerman's conduct and as circumstances turned out, Trayvon the 17 year old minor had good reason the fear for his safety from the armed 28 year old adult Zimmerman. Zimmerman's actions were rash and showed questionable judgement if not downright intent. I wouldn't bet the farm on him getting out of this.

[Johnson20]

35. Ganja most people who have made

a study of this sort of thing and a basic principle accepted and used by almost all law enforcement is that the true danger zone is anything closer that 7 yards, or 21 feet. This is a well know and well used principle.

[Ganja Ninja]

36. Really?

Got a link for that well known principle?

[Johnson20]

41. Here you are

It is based upon the experiences of some law enforcement officers in Salt Lake City. Just Google Tueller's drill for much more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

[Ganja Ninja]

45. Zimmerman wasn't facing an armed attacker.

On the contrary Zimmerman was the armed attacker. Any struggle that occurred that night was initiated by Zimmerman's actions. Trayvon's girl friend was on the phone with him when she heard Zimmerman initiate the struggle. Trayvon was unarmed and defending himself. I don't see where this applies.

[Johnson20]

53. Being a Ninja

you must realize they are dozens of ways to have a unconventional deadly weapon readily at hand

Added: Or hidden on you that is why police search folks. We are talking hypotheticals here I hope

[Ganja Ninja]

55. Yeah Skittles can kill in the hands of an experienced assassin.

Again pretty weak stuff to base a defense on especially when you're armed and your victim isn't. And you're the one following and accosting your victim without authority or cause of any kind. And you're the one who was advised by the police not to follow your victim. And you're the one that ignored that advise. And you're the one who has completed a course on neighborhood watch that instructs you not to patrol armed or initiate contact but to watch and report only.

At what point does this man have to accept responsibility for his repeated failure of judgement and aggressive behavior?

[alcibiades_mystery]

40. Then Trayvon Martin was always in danger of the armed aggressor, George Zimmerman

You also know damn well that the aggressor in an action has no self-defense claim on threat of great bodily harm unless and until he or she announces a cessation and intent to retreat, and even then, the claim can be challenged (even according to your own 7 yards rule). If a rapist grabs a woman in the dark and she fights back, the rapist can't turn around and claim self defense, and would likely have a very limited self-defense claim even if he announced a cessation and retreated accordingly. The case is precisely the same for George Zimmerman, who is perfectly analogous to a rapist in this situation, and, indeed, could have been engaged in an act of forcible rape for all Trayvon Martin knew about his intentions. There is no difference between a hostile rapist and George Zimmerman in that courtyard: they are exactly the same from Trayvon Martin's perspective. As soon as Zimmerman was in Martin's 7 yard buffer, according to your own logic, Martin has the right to defend himself, and Zimmerman has no claim, since he is the aggressor threatening a minor child without any authority and in the dark.

[Johnson20]

42. You guys, I am not saying that please take some time

and re-read my posts and get your emotions under control. All I'm saying is that you do not need to have grave injury before you can claim self defense IS THAT PLAIN ENOUGH FOR GOD'S SAKE? Scheech!!!

[alcibiades_mystery]

44. Wow

You're the one who seems pretty emotional.

Calm down, there, champ.

[Johnson20]

54. Well I admit I was

getting a little steamed for a while.

[alcibiades_mystery]

57. Take some deep breaths

You'll get over it.

[libertypirate]

47. Hot head with a gun is never defending himself. /nt

[Junkdrawer]

38. The police report and the physical evidence are in conflict....

I don't mean to say that police always lie, but they have been known to from time-to-time.

[grasswire]

51. troll bait, apparently!

Wow.

[joeybee12]

58. Wasn't the part about Zimmerman bleeding included in the follow-up police report?

In other words, added later by the second cop on the scene, not the first...in other words, highly suspect that they added--read, made it up--it when they realized Zimmy needed an alibi.

[Catherina]

59. Rec'd. And thank you MIRT. 2 trolls down just in this thread. n/t

[countryjake]

60. K&R!