If so, why would Zimmerman need to fire? Just the threat of the gun would've achieved the purpose of self-defense. If it's 1-2 feet, and Zimmerman's telling the truth, then he fired when Martin was coming toward him, not away from him. I'll leave it up to the forensics people to determine which is more likely, or if they can even determine such a thing.
Yeah, you can walk behind somebody but following somebody is completely different than just walking behind somebody. Again, where is it stated that I have a right to follow who I please? Somebody has never heard of loitering. I don't disagree with that. Yes but laws vary by state, region, location, whatever. I won't say Zimmerman harassed Martin but based on Florida's harassment laws, there's a possibility he could have been charged for it as well. I agree but why bring that up unless you are positive it happened in this situation. Again, we do not know who the aggressor was in the ultimate altercation.
Well if either side needs a closer estimate they can easily do the research. That isn't something that an ME would do. I am more interested in trajectory. Will tell more than range does.
2 feet max so the range for intermediate on a 9mm in my estimate would be a shot at a range of 1 inch minimum to 16 inches or so max.
Less than an inch probably. Anything not in contact where everything goes right in the hole the bullet made instead of around the wound.
There is not one scintilla of evidence that this dispatcher is a police officer. Further, the police dispatcher never ordered Zimmerman not to follow. He only said "we don't need you to do that".
And any reasonable non-mentally challenged person understands the meaning of "we don't need you to do that"
Powder residue inside the wound and none on skin/clothes = in contact or within mm's. intermediate - Stippling around the wound from powder residue . it wasn't jammed against the skin, but was close enough to get residue. no powder residue found at all These are the only things you can determine just looking at a wound. To get specifics, you need to recreate with exact same conditions and high repeats
The meaning is that the dispatcher would prefer that Zimmerman not do it. Regardless, it is meaningless legally.
The fact that law enforcement expressed to GZ that they didn't want him following TM, and GZ ignored that and did it anyway could well play a part in the legal proceedings.
He might make a good defense witness. Besides, I don't recall either the SP or FBI saying that the police dispatcher was making a lawful order.
moving goal posts did they say that not following the dispatcher "did not carry any weight" yes or no
In reference to something that legally had to be followed. Nobody is arguing that. That doesn't mean that it won't play a role in the trial. What is true is that GZ was given communication about what course of action he should or rather should not take by a law enforcement official. He did not follow that. That isn't a crime, but it can play a role in the trial
That is very interesting and if that is the standard for judging distance of gunshot then I am going to agree with you that we aren't going to know much from the latest gunshot info.
