Slashdot Mirror

While your link has since been taken down* this one is still up, and provides pretty clear reasoning that an arrest wasn't immediately made for legal and liability reasons:

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Zimmerman_Martin_shooting.pdf

I'd love to see that police report, but with that now-dead link and the pretty clear statement that the arrest didn't happen immediately was because evidence against Zimmerman hadn't been accumulated yet. Basically, they let him go based on his statement because they had no evidence to the contrary yet, and didn't want to A) be held liable for a wrongful arrest, B) screw the case up later on, and most certainly C) preventing a potential A from causing a for-sure B.

Makes sense to me, and my gut tells me we'll see a trial in this case. Still, it's just my gut. None of us can know the truth except Zimmerman and (hopefully, eventually) the investigators.

*From the Sanford, FL website: "The office of the State Attorney, 4th Judicial Circuit, State Attorney Angela Corey has requested that the City of Sanford remove all reports, videos and audio pertaining to the Martin/Zimmerman case from the website. Their office has provided legal justification for the action and they believe further access to the information will have an adverse effect on their efforts to come to a resolution to this investigation."

This info implies an investigation is proceeding, and the State Attorneys' office doesn't want to saturate a potential jury pool, although that's just speculation, too.

Trayvon Martin's killer claims teen punched him, slammed his head into ground

SANFORD, Fla. — The controversy surrounding the shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin took a new turn Monday when the Orlando Sentinel reported Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman told police Martin decked him with a single punch, then repeatedly slammed his head into the sidewalk.

The Sentinel said much of Zimmerman's account had been corroborated by witnesses, according to authorities.

Trayvon Martin Shooter Told Cops Teenager Went For His Gun

In addition, an eyewitness, 13-year-old Austin Brown, told police he saw a man fitting Zimmerman's description lying on the grass moaning and crying for help just seconds before he heard the gunshot that killed Martin.

The initial police report noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of the head and nose, and after medical attention it was decided that he was in good enough condition to travel in a police cruiser to the Sanford, Fla., police station for questioning. He was not arrested.

Martin's girlfriend had said in a recording obtained exclusively by ABC News that she heard Martin ask Zimmerman "why are your following me, and then the man asked, what are you doing around here." She then heard a scuffle break out and the line went dead.

Oh, and the whole fight happened on the grass.

Intesting, in light of the police report:

police report that states Zimmerman was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Note - "his back appeared to be wet and covered in grass" Hmmmm Grass for the back, concrete for the head.

Besides, the police let him go BEFORE there were any eyewitness reports.

Read the police report at the link. It is clear that the police at least knew who was there as they took names. Do you think they stopped at just taking names after someone was shot?

Martin, at 6'3" and 160 lbs was well within the normal range for BMI. Calculate it yourself.

One or more eye witnesses saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. And note the police report:

police report that states Zimmerman was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Note - "his back appeared to be wet and covered in grass" Hmmmm

And yet the police report notes that Zimmerman had grass stains on his back, and injuries to the back of his head. One or more eye witnesses saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. (The power of a sucker punch?)

police report that states Zimmerman was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

"his back appeared to be wet and covered in grass" Hmmmm

Also note that Martin's BMI would have been 20, which is well within the normal range.

Legally Martin wasn't a "child", he was a minor. And no, he didn't meet the definition of a child in American society either. He would be considered a young adult. 18yr old is legally an adult, and 17 isn't that far off. Now, if you think the 6'3" Martin was a "child", you either have a defective view of childhood, or are being disingenuous.

The 6'3" young adult, Martin, left his mark on Zimmerman.

police report that states Zimmerman was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Note - "his back appeared to be wet and covered in grass" Hmmmm

So, who was trying to injure, if not murder, again?

Martin left his mark.

police report that states Zimmerman was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Note - "his back appeared to be wet and covered in grass" Hmmmm

How convenient, I just happened to have this in a handy buffer:

police report that states he was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Also note - "back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass"

There is no evidence that #3 occured.

Other than eye witnesses that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and the police report that noted Zimmerman's injuries, maybe not.

Police report documenting Zimmerman's injuries:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

You'll also note that it documents Zimmerman's need to do laundry due to the grass stains on his back.

There is no "evidence" he was treated for any injury.

Yes, there is. It is directly stated in the police report. The fact that you don't believe it doesn't change anything. The police report would be accepted as evidence in court. The lack of a paramedics report specifying the bandages used on what wound doesn't change anything.

The police report that states he was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Plus, you are so interested in minutia, you miss the point that a white man (well, whitish, as he identifies as a white hispanic, having a white father and hispanic mother) holding a smoking gun standing over a black man is questioned and released, never arrested or charged. If the situation were reversed, then there would be a separate set of rules applied.

Zimmerman was taken into custody to the police station in hand cuffs and questioned. He was then released. Since it was apparently a justifiable self-defense shooting he wouldn't be charged. You don't get charged when the shooting is deemed justified under the law. I don't know how that could be any clearer. This might change since there is apparently going to be a special prosecutor appointed to look into this and I wouldn't deny the possibility of something being trumped up to charge him with as a result of Al Sharpton's agitation and various riots. Or maybe there are really new facts that would show that Zimmerman broke the law somehow - but do you think having thousands of people protesting, riots, and death threats inspired by the Black Panthers is really how this should be handled? The biggest impact of race in this case is Al Sharpton and company, and groups like the Black Panthers injecting themselves into the controversy.

No justice, no agitation

How about the surveillance video from the police station showing Zimmerman with no injuries after he was brought in? If his head was slammed into concrete such that he was at risk of dying, you would have been able to see it half an hour later. Here's the link you asked for. [cbslocal.com] I bet you don't even view it - you've already made up your mind.

Yes, I've seen that video. Now I've got a few things for you.

When the 6'3" (1.9m) tall Martin slammed Zimmerman's head into the concrete, it represented a lethal danger, not actual damage. It is like you playing in traffic on a freeway that doesn't stop - you are in danger of being hit and killed, but you aren't dead yet. Martin banged up Zimmerman, but didn't inflict mortal damage to him. Understand the difference?

Here is the police report that states he was injured and treated at the scene:

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Police surveillance video of Zimmerman may show head injury

Now that you have direct police testimony (go ahead, download the original), and a different view, you're left with a question - what do you believe now, and why? If you believe Zimmerman wasn't injured, you're simply wrong.

I just happened to have it handy.

But apparently Zimmerman was not injured [time.com] as he claims. Surely you must be aware of that, which makes me think bad things about you.

So, you are claiming that the police report - made before this became a controversial case - is false?

"While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head. . . .

Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD.

Do you have any evidence that the police falsified their report? If you don't, do you think I should think and feel like someone I can quote: "Surely you must be aware of that, which makes me think bad things about you" ?

Inconvenient narratives in the Martin case

Having seen the full video, I can come to only one conclusion: the video does not show any solid evidence of injuries because the quality is low. I saw some things that may have been injuries, but they could have just as easily been due to the shape of his head.

By the way, Sanford has put up the videos and 911 calls at http://sanfordfl.gov/investigation/trayvon_martin.html

Interesting thing about the video is that the original source looks like it was recorded on videotape as interlaced NTSC! You can see this when there's a great deal of movement going on. Just look for areas of great contrast like the hood of the police car when it rolls in and you'll notice the odd saw-tooth appearance of the hood's edge. This happens in other places.

What this means is that a lot of what is being seen is what has been filled in by software as it deals with crappy NTSC. Noise, color fringing effects, are all smoothed out. Then lossy compression is used during the conversion to digital video and potentiall important detail is lost.

The result is that the video appears better than it really is.

This is what most people want when they're transferring analog video to digital. But here is it's absolutely essential that we see the raw, unaltered video, if for no other reason than for understanding the limits of equipment used. It possible the equipment just wasn't good enough to pick up the details we're looking for.

Having seen the full video, I can come to only one conclusion: the video does not show any solid evidence of injuries because the quality is low. I saw some things that may have been injuries, but they could have just as easily been due to the shape of his head.

By the way, Sanford has put up the videos and 911 calls at http://sanfordfl.gov/investigation/trayvon_martin.html