GZ states in his testimony that he brought out the weapon because TM made a move for it. If I guy's beating my head into the ground and makes a move for my weapon, there is no time or reason to doubt that he will use it on me. The question remains "why pull the trigger?" Were they still wrestling over control of the weapon when the gun was fired? What did the ballistics report conclude about distance and angle?
What evidence is there that GZ pushed for conflict? Why call the police if conflict is what you want?
The picture shows that his head was slammed more then once into the ground. Adding that to a the closed fracture to his nose, his two black eyes, and his back injury, you would not fear for your life?
The picture shows two cuts to the head, that is what we are discussing. If you want to talk about the other injuries, then fine, but don't try to distort what I said or use ludicrous questions to make your point.
You trying to play medical expert based on the limited pictures of GZ's head is ridiculous. You don't know.
In fact you know what, trying to diagnose GZ based on a picture is pointless, so you should be directing that comment to the person I was talking to. You would know that if you actually read before butting in with your ill informed opinion as usual. Work on that brah.
That was brought up a few weeks ago. Ballistics determined the shot was fired within a few inches from Martin's body with the trajectory being horizontal.
Actually it doesn't. It shows that GZ had a couple of superficial cuts to the scalp. That could have come from a number of possible injuries during a scuffle none of which had to be having his head slammed into the ground.
What are the possible conclusions to be draw from a horizontal trajectory? All that really means is that the gun barrell was pointed, from inches away, squarely at TM's chest, right? Isn't that consistent with GZ's claims of Martin pinning him down and leaning over and smashing his head and face? Or were there witnesses to both men being on their feet?
horizontal ____________________ vertical | | | | | horizontal trajectory = at least one of them were standing up
Horizontal means that the bullet traveled parallel to the ground. Which means he wasn't shooting anyone on top of him.
Wouldn't horizontal means it entered Martin straight into his chest, as if he were standing up. M A ---------------- R T I N That would be horizontal. Now if here were laying parallel to the ground, the bullet would have then traveled vertical to enter Martin, and still appear to be horizontal. That is Zimmermans story.
The bullet does not have to travel parallel to the ground to appear to enter horizontally. If he was laying on his back, and Martin was over him and fired straight down into his chest, that would also appear horizontal.
