when people say something travelled horizontally, that means it travelled parallel to the ground what's the point of saying something travelled horizontally?
What they're saying is that if you looked at the wound relative to the ground it made a horizontal pass through TM's body. Of course you can simplify it by saying the bullet went from TM's chest to his back instead of from his ass to his head.
Have you ever seen someone pinned to the ground? When that happens the person doing the pinning's chest isn't parallel to the ground, it's at an angle. For it to appear to enter that chest horizontally somehow the shooter would have to be at an exact corresponding angle. Even then there may be different blood splatter and bullet pattern that would show that it didn't enter horizontally. Horizontal actually means parallel with the ground. hor·i·zon·tal [hawr-uh-zon-tl, hor-] Show IPA adjective 1. at right angles to the vertical; parallel to level ground. 2. flat or level: a horizontal position. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/horizontal So the coroner wouldn't use the term horizontal unless it was horizontal.
What medical reasoning did you use? And I everything I have said has been to illustrate that there is a REASONABLE ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE. I said if you can not see that you are blind as a bat. You may not think his defense is very strong, you may not believe him, but you can not argue that they have a reasonable defense and this is not an easy win for the state. Correct me if I am wrong, but only Ohio and South Carolina require put the burden of proof on the defendant. In Florida, the STATE has to prove that GZ attacked TM, beyond a reasonable doubt. I have seen zero evidence that can conclusively confirm that either GZ attacked first, or TM attacked first.
Could be wrong here, but I was under the impression that they could not determine the angle of the shot because it was not a through and through shot.
You are pulling whatever you can out of your ass to insist Zimmerman shot him in cold blood while they were both standing up. The coroner said horizontal and it was left at that. It said nothing about blood splatter. It said nothing about the relation between the two bodies. If you're a foot from the body, a pistol can be shot from a very wide rage of angles.
Have you read the thread? I've never insisted that GZ shot him in cold blood. The only thing I'm talking about is actual evidence. Sorry that discussing evidence bothers you. Now if you don't like the Medical examiner using the term "horizontal" which means parallel to the ground then take it up with him. That's who your beef is with, not me. I'm only commenting on the evidence.
horizantal/vertical is relative to the ground do you agree? if you're wearing a horizantal-striped shirt , when you lie down does it suddenly become a vertical-striped shirt?
Don't you watch any cop shows? :grin: It simply means did the bullet enter on a descending, ascending or right angle. It's a description of the angle of entry not the position of the shooters. There are several ways to position these two and have the entry to be horizontal.
Your point is well made for casual usage, but in this instance the language is meant to describe an angle of entry which is irrespective of the horizontal or vertical positioning of the two parties. It's REALLY about the barrel of the gun and the body of the victim. If you lie on your side in your horizontally striped shirt, are the stripes still "moving" horizontally? But yes, you do still have a horizontally striped shirt.
did the investigators say: a) the bullet's trajectory was horizontal? or b) the bullet entered trayvons body horizantally?
If you don't mind me asking, does anyone have the link to the autopsy report that said the bullet had a horizontal trajectory?
In a hand to hand scuffle the trajectory could have been anything. Trayvon was a punk looking for a fight and thankfully GZ was better equipped than that p.o.s. Hopefully GZ justifiably beats this race based charge.
Respectfully I say to you in all certainty that no investigator was there to watch the bullet traveling through the air-- level to the horizon as you would have it!
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/120687039/Trayvon-Martin-autopsy-report Page 3. Never does it say anything about the path of the bullet being horizontal.
Yeah it's always best to make up your own scenario of what happened and believe that rather than rely on any facts and evidence.
I think you and I are just going in circles because we have a misunderstanding. Earlier someone (maybe you, I don't even remember now) said the cuts on his head were evidence that he had been slammed into the ground and beaten severely. My point was that if he showed up to the clinic tomorrow with those wounds, 2 cuts to the head, and all we had to do to fix him up were apply a couple of bandaids, the "injury" would be listed as a minor cut and absolutely nothing more. I completely agree with you on everything else.
