Open Thread: Saturday, January 12, 2013

Welcome to all you lurkers out there.

We have two posts:

1. Short and Sweet, which is a follow-up to my post yesterday, Keep it Simple, Stupid. The first article explains the rules regarding the admissibility of uncharged misconduct and the second applies the rules to the case. Both articles are written for lay persons although lawyers may find them interesting as well.

2. Featuring: Please Welcome Kindheart101 Read Kindheart’s poem about Trayvon’s birth.

This is the open thread to discuss and comment on other topics.


232 Responses to Open Thread: Saturday, January 12, 2013

  1. colin black says:

    A missing Teen from the same vicinity was a coinsdence

    oops meant to say beyond coinsidence.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I just reread an old article (April 26, 2012) from the Daily Kos written by Willis Newton, and am confused by what the FBI was tasked to investigate. I have not ever read an official document that spells out what they are investigating. Do one of you have a link to those instructions?

      Here is the excerpt that has led to my confusion:

      [[ “The feds are not focusing their investigation on the original questionable actions of authorities. Their mandate is to discover if George Martin violated Trayvon’s civil rights, and their work will take time and likely produce little result. It’s also not their goal to produce a detailed report on their findings in the midst of an ongoing state trial. They seem to be holding back until after the jury decides the fate of George Zimmerman. Local corruption, incompetence or racial bias in this matter on the part of police or Norm Wolfinger’s part is not really in the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, unless such action rises to the level of a hate crime, or a clear violation of civil rights.” ]]

      Does this mean that they are not tasked to investigate the SPD or Serino? If this is the case, why did Serino hire Baez? Was it only because of O’Mara wanting to bring in police testimony?

  2. colin black says:


    I know its not right or very tactfull.

    However homicide cops have to develop a thick skink to try an desentisise themselfs of the horrors they encounter.
    Its there job to deal with the worst of the worst.
    Death notifications are the worst part of there job .
    At that moment in time Serrino had only one photo of Trayvon.
    The one with the tear thats been disscussed above.

    He was on his way to speak face to face with Travons Father in conection to his missing son. He obviously thought given Brandi Greens Address an the previous nights shooting of a teen next to that location .
    A missing Teen from the same vicinity was a coinsdence.
    So he took the only photo of Trayvon an headed out.

    We may not like it but other than takeing him down town to the mortury to veiw Trayvon .
    It was the only option he had an the quickest way to make a positive ID.

    Ive seen it on numerous first 48 hours were theres gang shootings over drug turfs short stoppin ect..
    An the vicitim ends up shot multiple times an probably not very photogenic.
    Family get rumours of an insident an turn up at scene.

    An LE show them photos of the victim an theres various responces.
    Some wail an scream an dissolve into blubbering crying unconsolable .
    Some fly into rage at the police an the world in genral sort of shoot the messenger attatude.
    Some seem eerilie quite an calm .

    Shock an greif can be expressed in numerous ways .All off the above can be just different stages of greif.


    Anyway what Serrino did may seem cruel an insesitive to us.
    But for a homicide officer death notification is part of there job.
    An if the victim has no photo ID then a post mortem photo is the only one they have to show victims loved ones to make a verrification.

    • Rachael says:

      I agree with some of what you are saying, but still, whenever we had a patient die, we always cleaned their face, closed their eyes, brushed or at least smoothed out their hair and pulled a sheet up like they were lying peaceful, even if they had been in a horrible accident before the family would come in to see them.

      There is no reason they could not have washed his face and put a blanket on him then taken the picture for his family.

      Okay, maybe there is a reason, but I am not aware of it. I have never seen a victim left at the scene for 48 hours!!! Gangs, drugs or otherwise, I’ve never heard of such a thing. Not even 24 hours.

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @ Rachael –
        Trayvon was left at the site – what, 45 minutes? It bothers me that it appears the body was left alone, from the photos. But it was not for multiple hours according to the Medical Examiner’s report.

      • Sleuth says:


        I couldn’t agree with you more. And then to make Mr. Martin go down to the SPD to listen to the 9-1-1 tape of his son’s screams just moments after informing him of his death, it’s inexcusable.

      • Rachael says:

        Oh – PiranhaMom – I KNOW that. I’m really sorry if it looked like I said otherwise. That was in response to Colin Black who said:

        “Ive seen it on numerous first 48 hours were theres gang shootings over drug turfs short stoppin ect..
        An the vicitim ends up shot multiple times an probably not very photogenic.
        Family get rumours of an insident an turn up at scene.”

        My point was, we do not leave victims in the field for 48 hours, not 24 and most likely not even 4. I think the whole idea is to move them from the scene as quickly as possible for the VERY reason Colin himself stated – so that families don’t get rumors of an incident and come there and end up with more problems. There is no reason for a family member to see their loved one or other loved ones like that. Maybe that happens in his country, but I do believe that ideally they try not to let it happen that way here.

        They don’t need to keep a body in the field until they get a positive ID. And they don’t need to show a crime scene photo to family. As far as I know anyway.

      • Xena says:

        It’s my impression that the photo shown to Tracy was the one taken by Wagner. That is why I question how Serino had that photo but not the one that Wagner took of GZ’s face until weeks later.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Plus, they probably play good cop / bad cop even in that situation to get a feel for the situation. After all, he probably wondered at that point whether Fogen’s thugfest story were true and possibly gauging Tracy’s reaction was part of this. Cruel, but they sometimes work this way.

    • colin, they have training for that. they are to serve and protect everyone equally! this was NOT a gang shooting. this was an asshole who shot an innocent kid. and serino knew it by that time!

      also, he had been to the scene already and if he couldn’t figure out that it was Trayvon then he’s dumb as a box of rocks and shouldn’t be doing that job.

  3. Xena says:

    @Professor. Please check your email.

  4. OMFG!!!!!! this is just TOOOOO much!!!!!!1 how dare he take that picture and shove it in TRACY”S face like that!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS HAS TO BE ACTIONABLE!! why would a COP A PROFFESIONAL used to dealing with death and ALL that comes with a HORRIBLE death NOT KNOW that is the LAST picture you want to give the parents of a MURDERED CHILD? i cant believe it!! i cant take anymore of this~!!!!!!!!

    you know what i just realized? what if Serino did that to shock Tracy and push him into such a traumatized emotional state, maybe even into a breakdown, or even commit suicide so that he’d just give up on everything, not ask any questions, ALL TO ENABLE gz to get away Scot free!!

    i froze when i first read Tracy’s description of that tearful picture. it killed me to imagine what his heart must of felt. i know how it is to have the cops come to your door. but i CANNOT imagine what i would’ve done if they showed me a picture like that. but i definitely would NOT have reacted well. has anyone ever heard of them doing something like that to *parents* of a CHILD???? this isn’t like Trayvon was in a car crash and mutilated or all fucked up. he could have taken a different picture. maybe even a tattoo or something. but NOT with his baby’s LAST TEAR coming down his little face!!!
    serino needs to pay for that!

    • Rachael says:

      THAT I agree with too. That was NO way for the police to tell a family that they (may have) found their family member. There was NO reason for Tracy to see that picture. What a horrible thing to look at and also, what if it had not been Trayvon, what if that had been someone else’s child. How traumatic would it have been as well?

      If they had found an ID card on him, I could see them saying they found a body with that ID, please come to the morgue and identify him, but there is NO excuse for what they did. None.

      • Val says:

        I agree Rachael…going to the morgue to identify him would have been more acceptable…however I wonder is this standard practice.

      • Rachael says:

        I don’t know Val, I was wondering the same thing. I just can’t believe if they don’t have ID they would show a crime scene photo or take you to the body of your loved one and ask you if that is him. But maybe they do. I just don’t know.

      • AND then because that’s not enough torture serino callously brings Tracy to the police station and in front of god and everyone, he goes ahead and pops in the audio of his dead and murdered child’s LAST screams for help! and THEN has the nerve to put down on official documents that Tracy doesn’t even know his own son’s voice!! so now he’s got Tracy and everyone on earth, thinking Tracy not only failed to protect Trayvon but wouldn’t of even recognized him screaming if he had been home!!

        he wanted to destroy Tracy. letting his son’s killer get away with such a bullshit story and telling him the killer is squeaky clean and HIS son is the savage isn’t good enough. he also tried to ruin Tracy and help smear Trayvon just as much as anyone else has!

        this is just incredible.

        i wonder if he sleeps at night. i wonder if he loves his own kids. because if he does i don’t see how he could have done that to these people.

        WHAT IF SOMEONE DID THE SAME EXACT THING TO SERINO, WOLFINGER, AND LEE??? what if some scum killed their kids and each one got the same exact treatment?? because if their kid’s weren’t their own people and innocents just as Trayvon was, i would LOVE for them to get the same treatment!

        that’s why everyone should be treated equally. that’s why the people involved in this scam need to be held responsible for their actions and looked at as an example of what happens when you don’t do the right thing!

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Supposedly there was a police CHAPLAIN there.

    • Sleuth says:


      I have spent the months since that article came out looking for information about what could have caused Trayvon to be in that state, but could find none. I even posted this same inquiry to another respectable blog, no comments or responses.

      Until I read the comments posted in response to my query from early this morning at approximatly 1:27 a.m., I really thought people weren’t talking, blogging, or tweeting about it because they had not read the article, or simply thought it too insignificant.

      Oh, by the way, if you scroll up to one of Professors comments on this thread, you will see where he did indeed address this subject back in August of 2012, (I think). So glad I stumbled upon his blog. It’s excellent!

      While the zidiots contend that Mr. Martin stated the screams on the 9-1-1 tapes were not those of Trayvon, what they fail to mention is that Mr. Martin was taken to the SPD to listen to the tape just moments AFTER seeing the post-mortem picture of his son. Not once taking into consideration that Mr. Martin is still trying to digest the very unfortunate news about the murder of his son.

      Like you, I just wonder why SPD or the ME did not take a separate picture of Trayvon AFTER they cleaned up his face, then show it to Mr. Martin. And why not wait a day or two to have him listen to the 9-1-1 tape?

      I think you may be on to something. Maybe they were trying to throw Mr. Martin off balance and cause further shock to his system.

      • yes, we have spoken about this a couple of times. but i’ve never thought it was anything other than Trayvon crying ( just like kutcher said she heard crying). i’m shocked to read what was just posted above about this phenomena.

        but for me personally it was kinda hard to discuss before just as it is to hear the audio of Trayvon screaming. i’m still not quite numb enough to listen to the screams closely. and still try to avoid them when i can.

        what the zimmerlovers don’t understand is that Tracy didn’t disqualify the screams, he was in shock and denial. serino knows that wasn’t the proper way to that! that was some kinda manipulation bullshit. i don’t know what serino was trying to do there, but he better not lie in court!

    • Malisha says:

      The cops had Trayvon’s button that he wore on his hoodie, right? So for a preliminary i.d., they could say, “Is this something your son was wearing?” The cops’ behavior throughout this entire case was criminal.

  5. Jun says:

    You gotta also remember that Fogenhats the 3rd, aka the defendant, after shooting the kid in the chest, lunged at him to get the kid facedown, and then sat on the kid’s back, and started molesting his body by rubbing his hands all over the dying kid’s body…

    Considering Fogenhats was about 210 pounds that night, having that sit on your back would cause aspyxiation, along with the loss of oxygen and blood from the gunshot, the straddling mount was an additional cause to the global brain edema that was severe…

    also consider the factor that the victim was distressed, as shown by his screams and tears on his face while the defendant acted extremely matter of fact and all his signs were normal… that is also a contributing factor to a loss of oxygen and blood to the brain because of distress and screaming

    • Rachael says:

      Jun, a tear (or tears) at the time of death may not mean what you are saying. There is a phenomenon called lacrima mortis (tears of death) that may be more of a reflex action.

      Who said GZ lunged at him to get him facedown? I missed that. I know he was found face down though and someone saw GZ over his back, pushing on it – but I never heard the rubbing his hands all over Trayvon’s body either.

      But I do miss a lot, which is why I come here, to have intelligent folk fill me in.

      • Jun says:

        Well he was seen on top of the victim, so how else would he get there, if not for a lunge onto the victim?

        I dont see how else he could have been perfectly mounted on the victim’s back

        As for the tears, it shows to me he was in distress and I have never heard of tears of death phenom but I do know that on the horrific 911 call, Trayvon was heard in a scared sad voice, so it matches up with the tears

        I do not remember where but I heard that he was seen by a witness or two rubbing his hands all over the dying kid’s body as he had him pinned facedown by straddling his back

      • Rachael says:

        Okay – I just thought I heard/read it differently, that GZ was standing over Trayvon’s back and he had his hands on his back or neck – I heard/read nothing about him being mounted on his back, and I don’t know why he would have to lunge after him if he was already down so I’m just not quite following it.

        I mean he Shoots Trayvon, Trayvon falls, GZ turns him over and was seen standing over him, pushing on his back or neck – for what reason? Who knows – checking to see if he was breathing? Looking for a pulse? Looking for a weapon? Looking to see if the bullet went through him?

        Just saying, I never heard anything about lunging, mounting or rubbing his hands all over him.

        And while your assessment of the tears is sweet and all, it really does NOT match up.

        But that is just my opinion.

        We do know that GZ shot and killed Trayvon and I do not believe it was any accident and it was certainly not self-defense.

      • Jun says:

        He was seen standing over him after been seen straddling the body, mounted on the back

        The kid was dying so I do not know how else for the defendant to get on top of the victim like that, if he did not lunge or jump on top of the victim, as there are no other scientific possibilities

        He was perfectly mounted on the kid’s back, aspyxiating the victim

        So how else would you explain the defendant getting on a dying kid’s back while the kid is facedown?

        The tears signify to me anyways, along with the other evidence, such as what sounds like the kid crying on the 911 scream tape, matches with what is seen on his face when he is dead

        There’s no scientific data regarding crying as a reflex action upon death as they could analyze the chemical make up of the tear to see if it was reflex action or emotional action, but there is nothing to back up that theory

        But let us use the KISS principle…

        (1) Trayvon was in a distressed situation. He was heard what sounded like pleading or crying for help. He was found with a tear on his face.

      • Rachael says:

        I do not agree with: “He was perfectly mounted on the kid’s back, aspyxiating the victim”

        And having seen many people die, I do not agree that tears upon death are “crying” in the sense you are saying at all.

        I DO, however, agree with the KISS principle in your last paragraph 100%!

      • Rachael says:

        “A tear, most often shed from the right eye and usually in the hours prior to death, can make a big difference.

        “We tell family members to watch for it,” said Monique Seguin, a nurse at the West Island Palliative Care Centre.

        “It’s like the opposite of a baby’s first cry,” she said. “It’s the last tear.”

        Seguin said the tear is most often seen rolling down the cheek of unconscious patients and is not tied to an emotional event.

        Known as the lacrima mortis, or the tear of death, the

        phenomenon has been observed widely but no explanation has been found.”

        Google lacrima mortis. There is a lot of info. This is just one article I found, but there are many.

      • Jun says:

        Witness 18 said she saw the defendant simply rise up off of Trayvon

        He was straddling the kid’s back with his hands on the kid’s neck as you say, and the kid facedown

        How else would you explain the defendant getting in that position? It sounds like he lunged or jumped onto the victim as it is a position that the defendant willfully put himself in, which was to be mounted onto the kid’s back, pinning him facedown. The defendant got on top of the victim, and to do so, one must make a forward movement.

        What I mean is that there is no scientific conclusiveness that the tears of death that you are claiming is a reflex, is conclusively a reflex because there has been no data suggesting that, only theory. Tears from reflex compared to tears from emotion have a different chemical composition and there has been no actual study done on that. Being in a distressful situation, such as dying or being killed or anything else, is more a likely cause for such a tear, rather than a reflex action. It sounds more like an emotional tear, rather than a tear from reflex.

        But using the KISS principle

        The defendant targeted and continuously stalked the victim, terrorizing the victim.

        The defendant then confronted the victim after catching him.

        The defendant then instigated a threatening situation for the victim and also made a threatening action by attacking the victim, to which the victim responded by telling the defendant to “get off” him

        The victim tried to yell for help

        In the middle of one of the yells for help the defendant shot the victim, thus halting the yells and pleads for help

        The shot was done while the defendant was facing north and the defendant grabbed the victim by the shirt and pulled the victim toward him to shoot the victim

        The defendant got on top of the victim’s back, straddling him, pinning the kid facedown, asphyxiating him

        During the straddling, the defendant was seen with his hands all over the victim’s body, molesting the victim

        The defendant simply rose up off of the victim

      • Sleuth says:


        I have heard of lacrima mortis but usually when it has been applied to people in hospice care, the terminally ill, and/or those experiencing end stage diseases.

        I’m just inclined to believe that Trayvon was most likely crying BEFORE he was shot and murdered.

      • Rachael says:

        @ Sleuth

        Most of my experience was in Trama and ICU/CCU. I never worked in hospice.

        I’m not saying it wasn’t, just that IMO, I don’t believe it was – nor do I believe it matters. It doesn’t change the fact that we hear the screams that stop as soon as we hear the gunshot. GZ admits to shooting Trayvon, Trayvon is dead.

        Adding extra emotional things like lunges and tears are fine, but not necessary when looking at the actual facts.

      • Jun says:

        The tear on the face may or may not break the case, however, it is there. I am inclined to conclude it is an emotional tear, not a reflex tear. I believe even what they theorize as tears of death, which has not been scientifically concluded to be a reflex action, is actually an emotional response to foreseeing death, as impending death is an emotionally strong time, so I believe even tears of death are actually emotional responses, rather than reflex.

        As for the lunge, like I said, it may or may not break the case, but he got on top of the victim somehow, and the only scientific conclusion I can draw, is, that he lunged onto the victim, to get mounted on the kid’s back, and get his hands on the victim’s neck and other areas of the body, which also caused the asphyxia to the victim. The defendant willfully got on top of the victim after shooting the victim. Considering the short amount of time after the shot, he had to have lunged onto the victim.

    • Sleuth says:


      You make a whole lot of sense, especially when it’s put all together. I’m hoping the picture is submitted as evidence.

    • Jun…Before I read the rest of the comments, I posted something similar to your last sentence….I’m glad that you thought of that too……you said it better though.
      One other thing….if fogen grabbed Trayvon’s hoodies tightly in his fist and pulled on them, the police could have seen the scrunched wrinkled grab marks on the fabric. By turning Trayvon over onto the wet grass, the moisture from the wet grass would have relaxed the wrinkled marks on the fabric and make the “grab mark” wrinkles disappear.

  6. colin black says:

    Sleuth says:

    January 13, 2013 at 1:21 am

    The SPD Chaplain showed Traci Martin a picture of Trayvon the morning after he was murdered. The picture was taken the night of the murder.

    I have been following this case very closely from day one, and nothing has gripped my attention the way Traci Martin described the picture of his son post-mortem, and those chilling screams.

    Mr. Martin described the picture as:

    “his eyes rolled back, a tear on his cheek, and saliva coming from his mouth”.

    Does anyone believe the picture will be used as evidence in the case?

    Any ideas about what could cause of this?

    I’m thinking the confessed killer tried to smother or strangle Trayvon; or perhaps it was a result of just sheer fright. I do remember two female witnesses saying they saw the confessed murderer straddling Trayvon’s body.

    I do believe the murderer turned Trayvon’s body facedown because such a sight might have repulsed him.

    I waited patiently, hoping to get some clarification from the ME’s report about what could have caused, “his eyes rolled back, a tear on his cheek, and saliva coming from his mouth”, but saw no mention of it in any of the media/evidence dumps. Perhaps I over looked it.

    “Trayvon Martin: Before The World Heard His Screams”.


    Sluthe i m o…

    Accused had never shot someone at intemediete range almost centre chest.
    There were no sirens as the law tends to use stealth an are trained to turn sirens off on aproach to crime events.
    Although accused knew the police where arriveing any second .
    Even before he shot Trayvon he was formulating an excuse / defence.
    And i m o the reason he shot to kill was to silance.
    He knew he hadnt captured a gangbangin burglar.
    He had harrased an called the police on a child an assaulted him just next to where he was a legal resident/geust.
    He paniked an his sel perseived sheriff of the retreat image in his deranged brain
    Was more important than this persons / life.
    Terrrified the police would arrive any minute an disscover he was in the wrong.

    He had his victim pinned down by weight an had a fistfull off his sweatshirt/hoodie for good measure.
    He reached round drew his gun takeing carefull aim to avoid his hand
    All the while telling Trayvon.
    You are about to die an he shot an silanced Trayvons last desprate NOOOOOOOOOOOOObANG,

    He had to mess with the body or Trayvons dieing last few breaths
    As I said never haveing shot someone before.An even usein hollow point bullets.
    He was scared the bullet could have penertrated Trayvons chest an exited into the ground beneith .
    If that were the case he couldnt claim he was being beaten by an atttacker above him an was forced to shoot from below.
    So he had to look see if indeed the bullet had gone through.
    So flipped Trayvon over an saw there was no exit woulnd so his lie was good to go.
    All he had to do is find an excuse for flipping the body as he couldnt tell the truth m o o.

    • Sleuth says:


      I agree with most of what you’re saying, however, none of what you’ve posted offered any possibilities as to why Trayvon’s “eyes were rolled back, a tear on his cheek, and saliva coming from his mouth”.

      Just wondering if it was caused by the gunshot (which I am inclined to dismiss), or did it happen before he was shot, and if so, what could have caused it.

      I’d like to hear your thoughts. Thanks.

    • Malisha says:

      I think he shot Trayvon while Trayvon was on his back on the ground or nearly on his back on the ground. I think he turned the body over once he was sure Trayvon was dead so that he could check and make sure no bullet or bullet fragment had exited. If that had happened, he would have had to give a different story (NOT the Trayvon-mounted-on-top story) on the off-chance that some cop Tim Smith/Bill Lee couldn’t influence asked him questions. If you have shot someone who was beating you up, you do not then holster your gun and spread out their hands to see if they were holding something.

      BTW, right now there is a great deal of silence from O’Mara.

      Trouble in Paradise?

      Is the trouble made of money?

      Or was there a deal made and the Fogen camp is trying to arrange his escape before the deal is closed?

      • Xena says:


        I think he shot Trayvon while Trayvon was on his back on the ground or nearly on his back on the ground.

        The 911 call that captured the screams provides for a change of sound/direction just before the shot is fired. Based on those sounds, it is my belief that GZ, having Trayvon in a take-down maneuver, actually jerked or stood him up releasing his grip, hoping that Trayvon would stop screaming. (Because you can hear GZ’s voice telling Trayvon to “shut the fuck up.”) Trayvon then screams out a long “Noooo” followed by a faint “help” that is cut-short with the gun shot.

        It is reported that the FBI received that recording to enhance it to determine what GZ was saying to Trayvon. If the Sony software I use enhanced the redacted recording enough for me to hear GZ’s voice, I am sure that the programs used by the FBI have enhanced the tape loud and clear.

        • PiranhaMom says:


          If Zimmerman released his grip, then the analysis of why the holes in the shirts don’t match the bullethole in the torso doesn’t work. The analysis also accounts for why the GSR is on the fabric, but not on the torso, because the “air locK separating fabric and toro represents the shooting at “intermediate range.”

          • Xena says:



            If Zimmerman released his grip, then the analysis of why the holes in the shirts don’t match the bullethole in the torso doesn’t work.

            I’m sorry I wasn’t clear. The release of the grip pertains to the take-down maneuver. GZ drew his gun and stood Trayvon up by and while holding on to Trayvon’s shirts. But Trayvon continued to scream out. As GZ told Hannity, he was terrorized that the cops would arrive, find him holding his gun, and shoot him.

          • PiranhaMom says:


            @ Xena,

            As I see this in my mind’s eye, GZ has Trayvon pinned to the ground by kneeling his 207 lbs. on Trayvon’s arms. With the pressure of over 100 lbs. on each of GZ’s knees pressing into Trayvon’s arms, the pain is excruciating.

            This maneuver guarantees that Trayvon cannot strike out at GZ with arms, fists or hands to defend himself or swat away the gun. That is how GZ can reach back and upholster the Kel-Tek “at leisure” and aim carefully to blast away Trayvon’s vital organs but keep GZ’s hand out of harm’s way.

            Trayvon is in excruciating pain and is trapped. GZ never relinquished his left-hand (dominant) hold on Trayvon’s shirts, until after the shot (having avoided shooting that left hand), when he flips Trayvon’s dying body over to frisk him for a weapon (as if he had a holster like GZ, on the back of the hip) and to see, perchance, if the hollow-point bullet made a rare exit from its victim – and embedded itself in the turf.

            Before flipping Trayvon, he checked Tray’s front waistband (see blood DNA evidence on inner shirt). If there had been a weapon, GZ would have an alibi: “He was armed. It was him or me.”

            Frankly, I expect the prosecution to avoid specifying whether Trayvon was prone when shot, or had been jerked up vertically. When you first consider the scene, it’s logical to think they were vertical – most shots are fired from a vertical position, and that is what the jury will be thinking. Fits the trajectory of the bullet just fine.

            But for GZ to jerk Trayvon up means there has to be a lot of scrambling, and GZ might lose his captive in the process. Kneeling on Trayvon’s arms is a secure position for GZ. It’s also less visible to the neighbors, and he knows at least one has seen him.

            Robert Jr. told Piers Morgan that Trayvon was kneeling on GZ’s arms. Was Robert an observer? Of course not. He is parroting what GZ told him.

            How many, many times has GZ said THE OTHER PERSON did something that, actually GZ himself did? Lotsa times! Did Trayvon have the training to know about kneeling on his opponent’s arms? No. But GZ the bouncer would know this.

            And note that in the re-creation on-scene for Sirino et al the next day, GZ claimed Trayvon was just crouched over GZ. That was GZ’s alibi about how he could extend his arm and fire. How could anyone in a crouch effectively lean over to smash a head or try to smother an opponent? No leverage.

            The crouch claim is insane. GZ would have kicked a crouching Trayvon in the balls, and scooted away.

          • Xena says:


            As I see this in my mind’s eye, GZ has Trayvon pinned to the ground by kneeling his 207 lbs. on Trayvon’s arms. With the pressure of over 100 lbs. on each of GZ’s knees pressing into Trayvon’s arms, the pain is excruciating.

            I see your point but respectfully disagree that GZ pinned down Trayvon’s arms. Take-down maneuvers bring the arms to the back of the body. They apply pressure to the palms of the hands that causes excruciating pain and paralyzes that entire arm. Even when letting go, the arm is useless for a few seconds. After taking a person to the ground using those maneuvers, it’s very easy to stand them up without any physical resistance.

            The sounds captured on the 911 call give the impression of standing to ground and up from the ground, down again and up again. It happened very quickly.

          • PiranhaMom says:

            @ Xena –

            Xena, I sure do agree with you re the numbing effect of the takedown. I have never espoused it. But I could agree with it. I am basing my analysis on GZ not being willing to give up his secure position, his brother’s comments on what GZ told him, the neighbors only seeing them on the ground, not vertica. But however it happened, the trajectory went straight in. The blood pattern on the back of GZ’s head fits GZ kneeling over Trayvon and drilling him n the heart. In any case, the shot was perfectly placed AND GZ had control over Trayvon by grasping his shirts. Murder 2 … only because they are not going for Murder 1.

          • Xena says:

            AND GZ had control over Trayvon by grasping his shirts. Murder 2 … only because they are not going for Murder 1.

            Agreed. Also, GZ admits to having physical control over Trayvon when he drew his gun and shot him.

            GZ was in an angry rage. He was in that rage when making the NEN call, as demonstrated by his language and name-calling.

          • PiranhaMom says:

            @ Xena,

            Not so incidentally, I should have also responded with this: I am impressed by your input re “rising tones” (volume) of the scream.

            Only recently I purchased earphones – not the cheapest, but not the best – and clearly I should “gear up” with better earphones to hear what you are describing.

            I found your comment re sound fluctuation to be significant. I am not necessarily wedded to any one theory – certainly not a year ahead of the trial. Thanks!

          • Xena says:

            Only recently I purchased earphones – not the cheapest, but not the best – and clearly I should “gear up” with better earphones to hear what you are describing.

            I became interested in hearing more after reading that the FBI had the tape that captured GZ’s voice, and were enhancing it to determine what GZ was saying to Trayvon.

            After I heard GZ’s voice cursing in the background WHILE Trayvon was screaming was help, I have worked with a Sony audio software program. If I can get it perfected, I’ll save that 911 call and see if anyone who has the correct plug-in for audio on blogs wants to post it. (I’m too involved with some other things now to obtain and learn about that plug-in.)

            But, GZ’s voice can be clearly heard, especially just before Jeffrey comes back into the house. I suspect that more is captured of GZ’s voice during the redacted portion.

            At the last hearing when BDLR said that two voices are captured on that call, I shouted!!! What a confirmation!

  7. SearchingMind says:

    Medical research leads me to the conclusion that ‘severe global edema’ is not possible after death. Thereupon I build the following arguments:

    1. Trayvon died as a result of gunshot wound to the hear (autopsy report);

    2. Trayvon also suffered severe global edema (massive injuries on both hemispheres of his brain) (autopsy report);

    3. Severe global edema is NOT possible AFTER death. It therefore must have occurred BEFORE death (pls. note that if suffocation/strangulation/asphyxiation occurred AFTER the “gunshot wound to the heart” and BEFORE Trayvon died or WHILE Trayvon was dying, that “gunshot wound to the heart” could not have been the (only) cause of death– according to the relevant theories of causation);

    4. Zimmerman was therefore suffocating/strangling Trayvon BEFORE he fired one single shot and killed him (something Zimmerman was able to accomplish because he was in a superior position/on top of Trayvon and absolutely could not have accomplished if Trayvon were on top of him, straddling and suffocating him, bashing his head repeatedly on the concrete sidewalk, and dishing out heavy blows to his head and face);

    5. Zimmerman may have continued suffocating Trayvon after the shot/Trayvon’s death (as witnesses testified). But that would not result in any form of cerebral edema.

    Your thoughts? Fierce rebuttals needed.

    • SearchingMind says:

      typo: pls. read: ‘Trayvon died as a result of gunshot wound to the heart ….’

    • “Medical research leads me to the conclusion that ‘severe global edema’ is not possible after death.”

      You’re going to have to provide some authority for that broad conclusion or I will not accept it.

      • Sleuth says:

        Hi Professor,

        It was not my intention to start a firestorm or debate about the description given by Mr. Martin about the picture that the Chaplain and the SPD officer brought to his home in an attempt to identify Trayvon as his “missing” son.

        I simply wanted to know if you, others had any idea what could possibly cause Trayvon’s “eyes to be rolled back, a tear on the cheek, saliva coming from his mouth”, as described by Mr. Martin.

        I really wasn’t expecting Dr. Oz or Dr. Lisa to chime in (although that would be cool), nor did I expect unnecessary insults to be directed at SearchingMinds who, like Jun, Aunt Bea, Malisha, Clayblock, etc. were simply offering possibilities.

        I agree with the the possibilities suggested by SearchingMinds because my cousin was raped and suffocated to death, but was not a victim of a gunshot.

        The neighbor who found her described her pretty much in the same manner as Mr. Martin described the post-mortem picture of Trayvon.

        Do you believe the picture will be, or has already been submitted as evidence?

        Do you have any ideas as to why Trayvon was found in such a state?

        By the way, I would love to have those nurses you mentioned weigh in.


        • I’m sorry to hear about your cousin. Please accept my condolences.

          I have not seen the photograph and I do not know the answers to your questions about possible saliva and a tear.

          I can say that I do not believe eyeballs roll back into the head upon death. Typically, the eyelids stop blinking and have to be nudged down to cover the eyes.

      • Sleuth says:

        Oooops! I meant to type “Colin Black”, and not Clayblock.

    • Rachael says:

      Certainly cerebral edema can occur from suffocation, as it can be caused by lack of oxygen to the brain, but it seems to me just the gunshot alone, causing almost immediate and total decreased blood flow (in other words, lack of oxygen) to the brain would be the likely culprit, especially given the severity.

      However, I can’t rebut what you are saying as I agree that cerebral edema most likely did not and could not occur after “death.”

      • Rachael says:

        Ooops, sorry for bothering. Just saw your response above with regard to nurses. I’ll keep my mouth (fingers) quite while you sort this out.

      • Rachael says:

        But I guess my point is, you can’t prove what you do not know and don’t have proof of.

        There is no proof that GZ strangled or suffocated Trayvon. I do believe GZ may well have attempted to suffocate Trayvon (as noted by his freudian slip as well as tendency to turn things around for himself), but there are no marks on the neck to show strangulation (that I am aware of) and no way to know if he suffered any brain edema from suffocation (a process which would probably have taken more time to accomplish than there was allowed in this situation).

        However, we DO have proof there was a GSW to the heart that caused immediate and devastating damage, which trumps all.

      • Malisha says:

        I saw some medical report that said with the damage to Trayvon Martin’s heart, it was still possible that he lived for a minute or so. I can’t remember where I read it.

      • manberk says:

        @Malisha The was an Orl. Sentinel article. I believe Stutzman was more interested in proving GZ wasnt lying about TM possibly fighting after being shot, an on going debate between the 2 camps, than she was interested providing anything meaningful to the discussion. I cant imagine whoever made those claims had enough information on this case to make such a determination of And I think the range they gave was a 20 seconds to a couple minutes which is pretty wide. edit: found it.

    • Aunt Bea says:

      There will be trauma to the neck for strangulation. (If looked for)
      Too many lo-o-o-ong screams for GZ to have been sitting on him.

      There will be doctors on both sides…specialists…years of experience…blah, blah,blah..

      I don’t need no stinkin’ paid witness a-tellin’ me what to think.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Professor, one of my most important sources is: Global Cerebral Edema After Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Frequency, Predictors, and Impact on Outcome by Jan Claassen, MD; J. Ricardo Carhuapoma, MD; Kurt T. Kreiter, MA; Evelyn Y. Du, PhD; E. Sander Connolly, MD; Stephan A. Mayer, MD.

      These uuthors are affiliated with the Division of Critical Care Neurology, Department of Neurology (J.C., J.R.C., K.T.K., S.A.M.), the Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (E.Y.D.), and the Department of Neurosurgery (E.S.C., S.A.M.), Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY.

      Also Professor, do not forget that this is an ongoing debate. I could be (and I do not believe that to be the case yet) wrong in my analysis. I am not afraid to be proven wrong. We are all brain-storming here. And that’s the joy of it all.

      • Rachael says:

        No offense, but you come across as very confrontational.

      • Sleuth says:


        Please forgive me, and I apologize for getting you drawn into a debate, or the insults you received which was not my intent. I was simply wondering why Mr. Martin would be presented with such a picture, and what could have caused the things Mr. Martin described.

        I know that you are sincere in your attempts to help me, and I certainly appreciate the time you’ve taken to help me better understand some of the possibilities as to how Trayvon could have been found in such a state. You’ve provided me with more answers than I had when I posted my query.

        Since the picture was used for the purposes of Mr. Martin identifying his son, just wondering why SPD or the ME didn’t take a second photo of Trayvon, after his face was cleaned up to present to the father.

        Keep up the excellent work!

      • That’s a start in the right direction, but now I would like a page reference. When someone makes a broad statement as you did, they should be prepared to back it up with a citation or reference.

        I’m certainly not upset with you. After all, on August 23rd I wrote about the defendant using positional asphyxiation to hasten Trayvon’s death so that he would not be able to tell the police what happened. In that article, I believe I stated that the massive global edema to both hemispheres of the brain might have been caused by the asphyxiation.

        Here’s the issue, IMO: What caused the “massive global edema to both hemispheres of the brain?”

        Was it the circulatory shock caused by the gunshot wound to the heart and lungs?

        Was it positional asphyxiation caused by the defendant sitting on his back?

        Was it a combination of the two?

        Was it something else?

        To answer the question, we probably would have to know when Trayvon died because one cannot asphyxiate a dead person and whatever one does to a corpse after death probably cannot cause “massive global edema to both hemispheres of the brain.”

        We probably need a clinical pathologist to answer this question.

        • blushedbrown says:


          Wrote in part:

          Was it positional asphyxiation caused by the defendant sitting on his back?

          Was it a combination of the two?

          I have to say Professor, I think it was a combination of the two.

          Most people think of Asphyxiation equals suffocating by placing a hand over a mouth. A person can be held in position that they can be asphyxiated.

          I believe that by GZ sitting on him accelerated the asphyxiation because he had him immobile. By doing this his brain already started swelling from lack of oxygen. IMO, btw I am not a doctor.

          IIRC, Patricia had posted an excellent theory of GZ having wrist control of TM. That was making him scream in pain before the shot. Lets take that in a slightly different direction and say he had him in “positional asphyxiation hold”. It is not hard to imagine that GZ may have known of “cop procedures” which include on how to hold a person in such a postion like the “choke hold”, or twist your arm way up behind your back. From what I understand of these holds they are mainly used to subdue and restrain a person. The only problem is that most cops go too far in their restraint hold and the person dies. I think they have ban most of these holds, but that doesn’t stop them from still using them.

          Many people have died in custody from police by using these procedures.

          And we all know that GZ was a wannabe cop. He could of gotten the know-how from Osterman, Youtube, books etc.

          Possible Scenario:

          GZ gets in the superior position and gets that ” postional hold” of Trayvon. Considering that TM ran, is scared, pulse is racing, in a fight with a stranger, young, confused, and doesn’t have alot of body mass, his body goes into overload. Screaming is his last resort. The brain is not getting enough oxogen. The screaming may have speeded up the asphyxiation. Then the sitting upon him makes it worse. Cutting off any regular air intake. But he is still screaming. GZ realizes this “hold” is not working like it is suppose to, its suppose to make him docile and quiet, maybe pass out a little. He’s docile but he ain’t quiet. Even after inducing as much pain to him as he could possibly do, he is still screaming help, so he shoots him. He made a conscious thought to take aim, make sure he didn’t hit his hand and fire one hollow point to his chest.

          I firmly believe this was premeditated. The charge should be Murder One in my eyes. I also firmly believe that even after he had control, and Trayvon was screaming help and begging for his life he still shoots him.

          In conclusion, I think the prosecution can make their case with this or without it. But it would be interesting to see if the do, considering the severe global edema in both hemispheres of the brain was reported by the ME. I would think they would try to explain why that happened “before” he was shot through the heart.

    • PiranhaMom says:

      @ Searching –

      You know how fierce Piranhas are …

      If Zimmerman suffocated Trayvon to death and THEN shot him (to conceal the suffocation?)how was Trayvon able to scream up to the point of gunshot?

      How many hands did Zimerman have? One for the gun (L) one for grabbing the shirts (L – dominant) and two to lean on Trayvon’s nose and mounth?

      I expect he earlier tried to put his hand on Trayvon’s mouth when he screams started, and there is some early fluctuation in the sound, but at the point of the killing, Zimmerman needed all the hands he could get to control Trayvon (who would obviously be wriggling to try to avoid the gun and escape)- a control he had on Trayvon for some time and instinctively used his dominant left hand for.

      Zimmerman’s right hand drew the tinny lightweight KelTek, which he fired single-handedly, and I believe it kicked back and slapped him in the face, because he was leaning over and close in to Trayvon’s torso when he carefully aimed and fired, being certain to miss his grasping left hand.

      The timing of the scream – and its finality – concurrent with the gunshot tells me that Trayvon was alive, conscious, aware and terrified beyond measure when Zimmerman murdered him.

      Your thoughts, mein Freund?

    • If fogen was sitting on Trayvon’s chest, it could make it very hard for Trayvon to breath…yelling out for help with what little breath he had in him. I would hesitate to even suggest that this could cause a decrease in oxygen to the brain that could cause something like global edema but I am not an expert.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I’m no nurse or medical genius – I served as a home health aide long ago – but a bleedout into Trayvon’s chest cavity would have the same result as smothering, I believe. The lungs and brain would quickly become oxygen depleted without enough blood to circulate and this would all happen before death.

    • gbrbsb says:


      I don´t want an argument but you invited “fierce rebuttal” so this may help clarify. I must agree with the professor as this is the result from a first quick Google search. IMO both a, c, and even b and e, would fit with a bullet in the heart, and/or lung/s:


      a. HAEMORRHAGE (An escape of blood from a ruptured blood vessel, esp. when profuse…)

      b. STROKE: (A sudden disabling attack or loss of consciousness caused by an interruption in the flow of blood to the brain, esp. through thrombosis…)

      c. ISCHEMIA: (An inadequate blood supply to an organ or part of the body, esp. the heart muscles…)

      d: SUBARACHNOID HAEMORRHAGE: (A subarachnoid hemorrhage is bleeding into the subarachnoid space—the area between the arachnoid membrane and the pia mater surrounding the brain.)

      e. INFARCTION: (The obstruction of the blood supply to an organ or region of tissue, typically by a thrombus or embolus, causing local death of the tissue)

      From life experience there is rarely a single cause of death but a chain reaction with a starting point, in this case the bullet. Also, from previous research I found that bruising does continue to form after death which is why forensic science covers injuries:

      1. Premortem or antemortem: trauma before death

      2. Perimortem: trauma close to, or at the time of death

      3. Postmortem: trauma after death

    • Cercando Luce says:

      IANAD but I do wonder if Trayvon was so frantically crying out for help, for so long, that he was low on oxygen before he died. I also wonder if the saliva around his mouth as seen by his father was from the murderer trying to smother him.

  8. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    Would Trayvon’s parents (or lawyer) have ever been given access to the evidence if this case had been dropped or not prosecuted?

    • SearchingMind says:

      Yes, pursuant to The Freedom of Information Act of the State of Florida (for information controlled by the State of Florida) and/or The Freedom of Information Act of the United States (if the information and documents are in the domain the United States government). The information sought must be released unless denial is grounded on law.

      • Aunt Bea says:

        Somebody somewhere was talking about a Mandamus writ.
        Not sure of the difference….

      • SearchingMind says:

        ‘Writ of Mandamus’ is an (a) Order from (b) a Court ordering (c) the State to (d) perform a specific duty (e.g. prosecute someone where the State has failed to do so).

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @ Searching,

        FOIA is Federal. States (including FL) use the Public Records Act and Florida was an early pioneer. While it’s familiarly called the “Sunshine Act” it is the Public Records Act and requests are PRARs (PRA Requests).

        Strangely there is no time limit to respond but the FL courts have rule they must be reasobably responsive. As an example, CA has a 10-day limit although that can be extended upon request by the government agency. I found that Sanford official responded almost immediately and were extremely cooperative.

        You just have to let them know you are making a PRAR and they hop to it. They know you are serious.

        • Xena says:

          Illinois has FOIA statute for obtaining LE reports and records. If the petitioner is not a party in the case, there is usually a fee. If requests are denied, there is a procedure for going up the ladder within the agency to appeal. If still denied, then the circuit court in the county were the records are maintained can be petitioned for an administrative order.

          In this case, the SPD denied Trayvon’s parents copies of police reports and the 911 recordings. It is my understanding that the SPD only released that information after Attorney Crump petitioned the court.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Xena, wasn’t it Sanford’s Mayor Triplett who released the 911 tapes, over the objection of Police Chief Lee?

        • Xena says:

          Xena, wasn’t it Sanford’s Mayor Triplett who released the 911 tapes, over the objection of Police Chief Lee?

          Based on what I read, after the SPD refused to release the tapes to Trayvon’s parents, they went to the Mayor who tried to get the SPD to release them but they still refused.

        • PiranhaMom says:

          @ Cercando,

          Yes, and he was the swing vote of “no confidence” that forced Chief Lee’s exit. Painfuul for the Mayor, who had advocated his hiring. But he could not comprehend, from moment one, why there had been no arrest. (FYI, this was his first political office.)

  9. seallison says:

    Minus 37 (with wind chill factor) this morning and my Mom wants me to drive her to the laundromat!!!

  10. Malisha says:

    Fogen’s story does not work, period.
    It doesn’t work with the schtruck; it doesn’t work with the timeline; it doesn’t work with the lights on the video; it doesn’t work with the phyiscal evidence; it doesn’t work with the witness statements; it doesn’t work with physical realities; it doesn’t work with the rain in the grass; it doesn’t work with the grass in the rain; it doesn’t work with the logic; it doesn’t work with the forensics. And I do not like it, Damn the Man.

  11. Manberk says:

    Cops arrive on the scene of a shooting, there’s 3 guys, 2 standing around, one shot, which has a gun is unknown; why was Joe not treated like a suspect, checked, unarmed, held at gun point with GZ and TM as T Smith reports? Does Smith even mention Joe? What’s up with that? Both he and GZ say so ( although their stories are completely different). Why didn’t the officers arriving of the scene view Joe as a threat? Why was he allowed to wander around the crime scene, where he was photoed, and even though a crowd had gathered he’s the only witness listed on the crime log? Suspicious. Clearly the scene was not as described in police report. Witnesses all have them walking, talking, Joe has GZ making a phone call, etc etc. So, really the cops, GZ and eye witnesses give 3 different dissimilar variations of the events.

    Back to his (joe) story, he never says GZ asked him to restrain TM. In fact, the dialog GZ describes between John and Joe are not corroborated by either. I don’t think either ever report GZ said he was being killed, or needed help. In fact, I think I remember reading in Johns FBI interview he didn’t actually make eye contact with GZ, and he was surprised that if he was NW he didn’t let John know that.

    The 2nd time GZ has TM circling his truck is the dead give away IMO. It’s totally impossible for TM to have taken the path GZ describes in the time he was on the phone. There are no 2 ways about it. Is that something they can suggest to the jury without actually doing a a reenactment? I know the professor mentioned a reenactment at trial would be a tough, and the D would have to agree. Is there another way to get across the impossible timelines?

    Anyway, I think the 2nd circling was an effort to fill in some of the time GZ realized he was actually stalking the kid and put his truck farther down TT than it actually was. But it simply doesn’t work.

    • Aunt Bea says:

      When I heard that an Air Marshall was associated with this case, I thought sure this guy (Joe/Jon) was him. It would have made sense for no alarms and he could have been viewed as a resource of information and crowd control. More folks stringing tape.

      He nor his wife called 911…

  12. SearchingMind says:

    @ Sleuth

    “his eyes rolled back, a tear on his cheek, and saliva coming from his mouth”. Does anyone believe the picture will be used as evidence in the case? Any ideas about what could cause of this? I’m thinking the confessed killer tried to smother or strangle Trayvon (…)”

    In addition to your observation, the autopsy report documented, among others, that Trayvon suffered “severe global edema” (read: massive brain injury on both hemispheres of his brain).

    Severe global edema, rolled-back-eyes , saliva-foams, tear on the chick, etc., are NOT consistent with injuries from a single gunshot wound to the heart and lung. Blasting the lung and/or the heart open will lead to the victim dying almost instantly-; cutting the lung and/or the heart open will lead to the victim bleeding out to death (within several seconds), but will definitely NOT lead to severe global edema, eyes rolled back and foams forming proceeding forth from the mouth (all at the same time).

    I agree with you: the autopsy report is quite cryptic. And the medical examiner would have a lot to say about the content thereof during the evidentiary hearing and/or trial.I think there are other key evidence in this case that are hidden in plain view right before our and (from a medical point of view) O’Mara’s untrained eyes. Your thoughts?

    • I do not believe your theory is supported by the evidence.

      Several nurses who post here told us that severe global edema to both hemispheres of the brain is a natural and probable consequence of systemic shock caused by a gunshot wound to the heart and lungs.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Professor, “nurses” (!) are NOT authorities in the field in question here and the argument you make amounts, IMO, to argumentum ad verecundiam. I would request you to pinpoint which “evidence” that does not support my theory. I shall be more than grateful if you would cite proper medical authority when refuting arguments such as the one in contention.

      • Knock it off!

        We have nurses here who work in trauma centers in teaching hospitals and in many cases they know more than many of the doctors.

        You are the one who made the assertion. Therefore, the burden is on you to back it up.

        I believe you are wrong and I am not going to change my opinion unless you convince me I am wrong.

        Please use plain English so we know what you are saying.

        BTW, please buckle your seatbelt and strap on your helmet because you are going to need that protection when they read what you wrote. 🙂

      • gbrbsb says:


        The professor said to you: “BTW, please buckle your seatbelt and strap on your helmet because you are going to need that protection when they read what you wrote.”

        Good advice cos as it can be painful as others, including myself, have of late discovered if you stray from the path!

    • Sleuth says:


      Holy Smoke! Dang You’re Good!

      One reason Mr. Martin’s description of the picture of Trayvon has stayed with me all these months is because my cousin was murdered. She was raped and smothered to death in her home; she was not shot with a gun.

      The neighbor who discovered her body pretty much described her in the same manner as Mr. Martin described the picture of Trayvon. So quite naturally, when I read the article, “Before The World Heard His Screams”, my cousin came to mind.

      My thoughts:

      From the first time I read Mrs. Corey’s Arrest Affidavit, I have always felt it was written in such a way to make room for additional charges. Perhaps she KNEW or strongly suspected additional crimes had been committed against Trayvon that had not been released to the media.

      She already had the confessed murderer’s own statement that he shot and murdered Trayvon, but not an admission of smothering/suffocation, etc. She would have to wait on medical forensics.

      I became more suspicious when the confessed murdered gave statements to SPD that Trayvon was “smothering” him (covering his mouth) with his LEFT hand, preventing him from calling for help.

      At the time I read those statements, I had no idea whether Trayvon was left or right handed, nor did I know whether the confessed murderer was left or right handed.

      However, once it was released that the confessed murderer was in fact LEFT handed, I concluded that it was HIM, and not Trayvon, trying to smother someone in attempt to prevent them from groaning and moaning.

      Those two female witnesses saw the confessed murderer straddling over Trayvon AFTER he had already been shot. They also heard groaning and moaning that they believe were the groans and moans of Trayvon. Other witnesses also heard groans and moans AFTER the shot.

      The confessed murderer admitted to straddling Trayvon’s body, touching it, and turning it over. I believe he was covering Trayvon’s mouth to stifle (smother) out the groans and moans, afterall, Trayvon was suppose to be dead already.

      I agree, there is more to this murder investigation “hiding in plain sight”, and the ME has more to share, but not until the appointed time.

      Now, you and I, and everybody else who has been following this case, know that O’Mara and West are not about to press the prosecution about this picture.

      • Malisha says:

        I think one of the witnesses (teacher?) said she saw Fogen over Trayvon’s body “kind of holding him down.” I think Fogen made up the “spread his hands apart” story to cover the fact that he knew he was observed on to of Trayvon. I think the “MMA-liar-witness” went along with a lot of Fogen’s massive projection. I think many of the things Fogen did to Trayvon, he later related as having endured at Trayvon’s hands. And one thing Fogen said that was bizarre and idiotic (even more than the rest of it) to Erwin, the “VSA guy,” was that Trayvon was on top of him holding his one hand over his mouth and the other hand over his nose and pushing as hard as he could “to try to suffocate [or did he say “smother”] me.”

        It’s not impossible that Trayvon omitted some moans or groans as he died and that Fogen slammed his beefy hands on the dying boy’s face. Not impossible doesn’t mean we have evidence of it, of course. We don’t have evidence of it even if it DID happen since the police let Fogen “wash up” without collecting the detritus of his wash-up. I think Fogen was washing his hands of the murder and the cops were assisting.

        Too bad those spots don’t come out as easy as Fogen or Lady MacBeth imagined. Lady MB from conscience; Fogen from forensics.

  13. Jun says:

    LOL The Fogenhatters are mad that they got outed for their cyberstalking and harassment and are dancing up a storm about it on facebook LOL

    Their argument?

    They are allowed to criticize you and everyone else and claim you are embellishing and maliciously attacking Fogenhats and we are not allowed to question anything

    Oh yeah, and they are claiming they weren’t stalking you, so I am guessing they were just going in the same direction as yall LMAO

    • Xena says:

      @Jun. Could you please provide the Facebook page this is happening on? Any defense he raises is evidence that he believes he has to defend himself. TYI.

      • Xena, go to GZ VS TM Debate Center on FB and read the thread from yesterday, Jan 12. Look for a post from Mike Thatcher. Apparently, he is the one who was somewhat involved in this issue with Prof. Leatherman. The thread will seem a bit broken because a TM supporter’s posts were deleted toward the end of the day. Overall, it is one of the most civil debate pages I have encountered. “In Session” also has a TM/GZ debate section, but that thread is vile from both camps.

        • Xena says:

          Xena, go to GZ VS TM Debate Center on FB and read the thread from yesterday, Jan 12.

          Diary, forgive me for not being Facebook savy, but do I use the initials or spell out the words to find the page? What does VS stand for? In the meanwhile, I’ll search both ways to see if I can find it. Thanks.

        • Xena says:

          Found it!! So mentioning his name on this blog might violate his privacy, but he has no problem using the professor’s name, that of his wife and daughter, and doxing (or as he puts it, vetting) wrong parties and making up things about them.

          I’m surprised he hasn’t taken down his FB page yet.

  14. Pulled from the previous post: I have a question. Is prosecution required to release information that would typically not be admissible? For example, if they interviewed witnesses supporting Trayvon’s nonviolent behavior, should that information already be part of discovery? I have read no discovery about Trayvon’s character yet. Have I missed something?

    • SearchingMind says:

      The answer is: No – because no evidence is a-priori inadmissible. Decisions on (in)admissibility are made on case-by-case basis. The prosecution does not have the authority to determine the (in)admissibility of evidence.

      Obligantions of the Prosecution:

      For fair trial to be attainable, prosecutors are obliged by law to provide the defense with any evidence that may potentially benefit defendants during the discovery period. This is generally known as the Brady Rule (named for Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 1963). Whether or not any of such material would be (in)admissible is immaterial during the discovery process. Brad-material are: (a) material that is (b) relevant to guilt or punishment of the defendant, (c) favorable to the defendant and (d) in possession of the prosecution or anyone acting on behalf of the State, or within the knowledge of the prosecution.

      According to SCOTUS, the prosecution is also obliged to produce any evidence that provides grounds for thedefense to attack the reliability, thoroughness, and good faith of the police investigation, to impeach the credibility of the state’s witnesses, or to bolster the defense case against prosecutorial attacks. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 442 n.134, 445-451 (1995). This is generally known as the Brady/Kyles rules.

      SCOTUS also held that Impeachment material (Brady/Kyles rules) must be disclosed, even if it does not directly go to innocence. If the police know about exculpatory information (including impeachment material) it is considered to be within the possession of the prosecution and must be disclosed pursuant to Brady/Kyles, even if the police never told the prosecutor about it. The prosecutor has an affirmative duty to seek out and learn of any exculpatory material in the possession of anyone else acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police (Youngblood versus West Virginia).

      • Searching – I am sorry, but I don’t quite understand your answer. Perhaps my question was not clear. Prof. Leatherman said that there was a great deal of evidence that exists to show that Trayvon did not have a propensity for violence. But I haven’t read in discovery any evidence about Trayvon’s character. So here is my question: Does the state have to turn over character information that they collect on Trayvon? If so, why hasn’t any of this evidence been released?

      • SearchingMind says:

        The prosecution can only be obligated by law. Above I laid out what the prosecution is obliged to. If the information you refer to does not fall within the ambits thereof (and I think that is the case), then the prosecution is not obliged to turn it over to anyone (unless the defense motions for specific discovery and the judge grants the motion). I do not know how to be as simple as the professor. Maybe he can weigh in and explain the subject in layman’s terms. He is extremely good in doing that.

      • Aunt Bea says:

        Hmmm, I thought the judge ultimately ruled on the evidence admitted.
        Prosecutor arbitrarily decides relevance of facts and requests/fights (argues) for a ruling. Defense does the same.
        “Exculpatory” evidence is in the eye of the beholder. “Reasonable doubt” points are not exculpatory, per se.
        See, this is where you get juries learning things after the fact.
        Then the appeals process begins or jurors get ragged on.

        A motion in limine? Has the Professor had a blog on that?

        How about the probative vs prejudicial evidence dilemas.

        My point being, maybe I have it all wrong….LOL

        I read a document that stated “there is nothing favorable to the defendant”.
        Turns out there was quite a bit favorable for reasonable doubt.

        Murder, confession case closed. Insanity defense. Almost ALWAYS a loser…..

        But, that shit doesn’t happen……

      • Sleuth says:


        I wanted to respond to you regarding your response to Dave but could not find a “reply” button.

        I just wanted to say thank you very much for expressing so succinctly, and so professionally, what I could not.

        The points you made in your response to Dave are exactly the questions I wanted answers for. Thanks again.

        SearchingMind says:
        January 13, 2013 at 7:39 am
        “Dave, I do not see the point you are making. Assuming (in your own words) “the liquid Traycy Martin identified as a tear could have been a tear” – what is (a) the medical explanation- and (b) the evidentiary significance/probative value thereof. I think those are the questions Sleuth wants addressed. There is no light at the end of the tunnel of (unnecessary) sophistry (i.e. the liquid could have been rain water or drool from Zimmerman or drool from Trayvon or drool from one of the officers, or drool from an insect, etc.) and going down that tunnel is not constructive to the discussion.”

  15. Sleuth says:

    The SPD Chaplain showed Traci Martin a picture of Trayvon the morning after he was murdered. The picture was taken the night of the murder.

    I have been following this case very closely from day one, and nothing has gripped my attention the way Traci Martin described the picture of his son post-mortem, and those chilling screams.

    Mr. Martin described the picture as:

    “his eyes rolled back, a tear on his cheek, and saliva coming from his mouth”.

    Does anyone believe the picture will be used as evidence in the case?

    Any ideas about what could cause of this?

    I’m thinking the confessed killer tried to smother or strangle Trayvon; or perhaps it was a result of just sheer fright. I do remember two female witnesses saying they saw the confessed murderer straddling Trayvon’s body.

    I do believe the murderer turned Trayvon’s body facedown because such a sight might have repulsed him.

    I waited patiently, hoping to get some clarification from the ME’s report about what could have caused, “his eyes rolled back, a tear on his cheek, and saliva coming from his mouth”, but saw no mention of it in any of the media/evidence dumps. Perhaps I over looked it.

    “Trayvon Martin: Before The World Heard His Screams”.

    • Jun says:

      I feel they will. It is evidence that Trayvon was in distress.

      • Sleuth says:


        I agree, the description of the photo gave me the immediate impression that Trayvon had been in some type of severe distress.

        Although I do hope the picture is part of the evidence submitted in the courtroom, I hope it never makes its way to the world wide web.

        I just can’t imagine what it must be like for a parent to see his child in such a state.

        • There are far worse photographs that will be introduced at trial. I refer to the autopsy photographs.

          I hope sufficient precautions will be taken to assure that those photographs and the one you mention are not released to the public.

    • Dave says:

      Trayvon’s body had been laying face down on wet grass. The liquid that Tracy Martin identified as a tear could have been rainwater, it could have been drool from the killer’s mouth….or it could have been a tear.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Dave, I do not see the point you are making. Assuming (in your own words) “the liquid Traycy Martin identified as a tear could have been a tear” – what is (a) the medical explanation- and (b) the evidentiary significance/probative value thereof. I think those are the questions Sleuth wants addressed. There is no light at the end of the tunnel of (unnecessary) sophistry (i.e. the liquid could have been rain water or drool from Zimmerman or drool from Trayvon or drool from one of the officers, or drool from an insect, etc.) and going down that tunnel is not constructive to the discussion.

      • Sleuth says:


        “Trayvon’s body had been laying face down on wet grass”.

        Perhaps you meant to say, “Trayvon’s body had been placed face down by the confessed murderer”, who admitted he turned Trayvon’s body over.

        Mr. Martin did not just describe “a tear”, he described it as “a tear on his cheek, and saliva COMING FROM his mouth.”

        So are you saying that being face down could cause Trayvon’s eyes to roll back?

      • Jun says:

        Tears have a different chemical make up than rain water and it is fairly much a given if it looks like a tear rolling down the face

      • Dave says:

        Tracy Martin was stating his interpretation of a photograph of the body of his recently murdered son. Apparently it showed liquid by the mouth and on the cheek which Mr. Martin, not unreasonably, interpreted as saliva and tears. I was merely pointing out that there are multiple possible sources for these liquids. I doubt whether they were analyzed and don’t believe that we will ever know what they were for certain. I have no idea what caused the eyes to rotate upward.

    • Aunt Bea says:

      I would want to see the pictures. All of them. In color. First generation. As well as the source hardware.
      As we have seen, pictures tell a tale all their own.

      If that saliva wasn’t smeared, there was no CPR.
      That white bag (sealed the GSW) should be loaded with TM’s blood. (still think the brown bag is too collapsed to have arrived only 5-6 mins before the white bag) My opinion…..
      If Trayvon had blood on his hands, the ME should have swabbed it.
      No mention of First Aid Kit/Tweezers ownership and arrival at scene.
      No much mention of “button”‘s whereabouts upon/after arrival at ME office.

      Not sure if I believe the completeness of ANY report in this wretched display of law enforcement.

      And let’s face it, that is the heart of any prosecution.
      Right or wrong.

      • Malisha says:

        I’m with you, Aunt Bea. I have never gone for that “CPR” bullcrap. I think the scene at the RTL that night, involving every single officer and probably every single EMT, was one that would only bring horrifying shame on normal people. I think they knew “the suspect” was dead from the time they walked (leisurely in the rain) from their squad cars and they knew “the shooter” was dirty from even before that moment. Tweezers is a peculiar addition to this whole scenario. The EMT who testified to the “45% of his head was covered with blood” was part of the corruption, in my opinion. From the first time I heard it, I said, “Why 45? 45 is so close to 50, why 45?” My belief is that he knew he couldn’t get away with saying half Fogen’s head was covered with blood so he figured saying anything UNDER 50 could fly if he was challenged with real evidence of anything, but he did not expect to be challenged because he never imagined real evidence would have to be used. And we may find out that ultimately he was right and there is a plea deal done. That would give Junior a chance to go on more junkets.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Do we have anyone here who can determine (using the 7-11 video) where the button worn on the sweatshirt is… relation to the bullet hole on the sweatshirt?

      • Sleuth says:

        @Aunt Bea

        I agree with you about the CPR, and that half done investigative work done by SPD, however, I hope they never make the picture public that Mr. Martin saw of his son.

        I just don’t remember the picture being a part of any of the media/evidence dumps, and there must be a reason for that.

  16. seallison says:

    mountainmanpat: This is what I am talking about! Colorado is even mentioned. Give it a watch from SanfordWatch:

  17. I am wondering if there is somewhere I can look at the gunshot evidence? I read something about Trayvon’s shirt not lining up with the bullet hole in him. I believe it suggested that his shirt was being pulled as if someone had a hold of it and he was trying to get away when the shot was fired into him. I have always believed that gz had somehow tried to detain Trayvon in some way, to hold him by force until the police got there. This would certainly prove that gz had his hands on Trayvon and was keeping him from “getting away”. Thank you for directing me to info….

    • Jun says:

      I can explain it to you

      (1) The hoodie and undershirt has to be pulled down and to the left to line up with the wound in the chest. Considering the wound is straight through, this had to have been done by the defendant with his left hand. There are likely forensic trace marks of where the defendant gripped the shirt

      (2) The wound in the chest showed to be intermediate range. The gun when shot, had the muzzle make close contact with the hoodie and undershirt only, when fired. This signifies to me that the shirt was pulled forward and stretched in front of Trayvon as well. This also signifies that the defendant pulled the victim towards him to continually terrorize and threaten the victim before shooting him straight through the heart and lung.

      (3) There was no foreign DNA on Trayvon’s hands or sleeves or cuffs of his shirts, so he was not attacking the defendant at all when shot.

      (4) Trayvon has been identified as the person screaming for help.

      There you have the scene of the final moments. The defendant was threatening the victim at gunpoint and the victim continually tried to get away but the defendant would not let him go and be free with liberty and even pulled the victim toward him to take his life

      • thank you Jun, that is pretty much the awful picture I have in my mind I hope they checked Trayvon’s clothing for dna from gz, would that prove he had hold of it or only that he (gz) had come in contact with it? do finger prints come out on clothing material?

      • nancybenefiel says:

        Witness#18 says GZ was sitting on top of TM in the middle of the lawn. She says there was no figting going on at the time GZ shot, She says Trayvon was screaming, begging and that GZ just shot him, As I understand self defence law, even if there had been a fight earlier, GZ obviously won and was in no danger at the time he shot Trayvon. He had to actually have heard the sirens coming.. How can he claim self defence?

      • Jun says:

        I am actually not surprised by the defendant. Evil sociopathic people will continually lie when having to face responsibility for their actions. Look at Jodi Arias. She stabbed her boyfriend 27 to 29 times, slit his throat and also shot him in the head. She first claimed it was self defense but now says it was someone else that killed the boyfriend. She has continually lied and has lost all credibility and her lawyer is afraid of putting her on the stand.

        • Xena says:


          She first claimed it was self defense but now says it was someone else that killed the boyfriend. She has continually lied and has lost all credibility and her lawyer is afraid of putting her on the stand.

          Actually, she told 3 lies in this order:
          1. She wasn’t there.
          2. She saw someone else kill her boyfriend.
          3. She killed him in self-defense.

          The other day, the attorneys who comment on In Session said that because Arias is claiming self-defense, she must take the witness stand. It’s my impression that they know a defendant does not have to testify, but the nature of raising a self-defense claims makes it almost mandatory. I watched the trial the other day when prosecutors retraced her commute from Utah to Arizona, and also when the print expert testified.

      • Jun says:

        Well Judy, Fingerprints and DNA can transfer to clothing. The oils in the hands would have left traces. I cant look at the evidence first hand but my guess is there will be grip marks where the defendant Fogenhats gripped Trayvon by the shirt, as the above stated is the only explanation I have for the forensics and ballistics with the witness testimony (what they released to the public). I know they checked Trayvon the victim’s clothing forensically for trace and DNA, etc. and they did not find anything foreign on his hands, sleeves, or cuffs.

      • Jun says:

        I dont know what to make of the Jodi Arias case as I have not seen the forensic evidence or anything else, only that her statements to police are contradictory, inconsistent, or outright lies and a couple statements from the ME

        Considering that there are stab wounds into the back and back of the head and neck, throat was slit, and the gunshot, and the amount of stabs, it sounds like overkill to me, like killing someone out of anger. If they have the murder weapons, they should be able to tell how the knife was held and which hand, and the ballistics of the gun. Considering the defensive wounds found on the victim, and that there are numerous wounds in the back area of the victim, it looks as though the victim tried to get away and Jodi Arias just went crazy killing the victim and it is not self defense.

        I do believe that she has to take the stand because only she can assert her claims of self defense and she has no credibility, so she is in a similar situation as Fogenhats

        • Xena says:

          @Jun. When testimony was presented at trial about the several stab wounds to the victim’s back, I spoke out loud — “How can that be self-defense.” The gun used to shoot him in the forehead has not been recovered.

      • Dennis says:


        I was just watching that earlier on Nancy Grace. She compared Jodi to Casey Anthony aka Totmom.

  18. colin black says:


    He didnt want to return but a reconstruction was asked for an at first I honestly think fooggen didnt even realise he would have to leave the confines of the car.
    Unlike the previous night he was anxious to keep his but in the car .An do a commentrary from there .Like he could jus t stay in the cab an point to the cut through an describe events.

    In the vt watch the panic flash across his face an the suprised escemation ….OH….He utters as the detective instructs him to exit the car an start walking

    He is bricking himself an not happy at all at the walk part of the re enactment because he knows his story is B S an actuall realpolice work scrutinty will expose his inconsistent self serveing BS.

    Thats why he keeps repeating the word walking walking as they start along the path to the T.
    Over use of the word walk as in to convinse the listeners he was WALKING not running or chaseing but slowly walking to get an un asked for unused adress to meet officers.

    He was in fact running an he knows it to combat this problem he slyly tells his story out of seqence.
    Causeually remebering to mention when theve walked throuth the path to the Circle street,
    Oh by the way I forgot to say that back at the T .
    The disspatcher asked me if I was following him an I said yes but only because I was in the area.

    I M O He delibretly told that story out of seqence to muddle an confuse an also to caver the fact he reaches the T ten or eleven seconds after he exits his car.
    An is at the T whe when he is told we dont need you to do that an he say Oh Kay .
    He is definate on that timeing an said in sevral recorded an written statements.
    Anneven dureing the vioce stress test he repeats this info.
    Daves vt showed us it take 40 second to walk the disstance he covered in ten seconds walking just walking.

    Also when they get to the timeing of the attack his times also all out of whack
    He would have still been on the phone with Sean the non emegancy guy if we follow his time line dureing the re enactment,
    And whilst stood at the T an makeing a total conradictery fool of himself describeing Trayvons visious attack out of no where an his life or death struggle.
    You can see him wistfully stareinf 40 5o yds along the pathway ro where he actuallly shot him.
    But knows he cannot be there .
    No i m o he did not enjoy any type of thrill by retraceing his steps with the law.
    I think he hated every second of it haveing to try an acount for the unacountabible?

    • Xena says:


      I M O He delibretly told that story out of seqence to muddle an confuse …

      And the Zidiots continue to take the NEN call out of sequence in effort to cloud GZ’s lies. When GZ said that Trayvon was checking him out and had his hand in his waistband, the dispatcher responded saying to tell him if the guy did anything else. That was before Trayvon ran. Then Trayvon ran.

      It was due to the intelligence of the dispatcher in picking up the changes in sound that he asked GZ if he was following the kid. GZ replied “yes.”

      What followed is of utmost importance; i.e., “We don’t need you to do that.”

      The Zidiots however, continue to argue that when Sean said to tell him if the guy did anything else, he was giving approval to GZ to follow even if it meant getting out of his truck to do so.

      I truly hope that O’Mara doesn’t try pulling that out-of-context argument in the courtroom. If he does, he will look like a man who never attended high school, much less law school.

      • looneydoone says:

        I was reviewing the ME’s Autopsy Report this morning and found something curious in this report
        ECS CAD #12-0570199 02/26/2012 8:32PM
        LE CASE 2012-50001136
        from page 2 (of 2)
        Case Summary; “At approximately 1910 hrs on 02/26/2012 911 dispatchers received a call from a resident of the complex. The resident advised of a B/M who was at the complex between townhomes. The caller stated that the male should not be in the area *AND* that he observed the male while out walking his neighborhood watch” !!!

        Also noted this am while reviewing the ME’s Autopsy Report;
        on the front & rear view illustrations , the ME has marked an “X” on Trayvon’s left “ring finger” (finger #3)…BUT has noted an abrasion on “finger 4 of the left hand” (#4 would be the “pinky”)
        I realize there was a sense of urgency in conducting the Autopsy which would exclude a representative for Trayvon’s family to act as a witness during the post-mortem exam. What’s the excuse for misidentifying which finger on Trayvon’s left hand was found to have a 1/8″ X 1/14″ abrasion ?
        The Autopsy was begun 10:30am on 02/27/2012
        *They* were in a rush to brush this murder under the rug !

    • manberk says:

      @looneydoone interesting. Also says GZ confronted TM in 2 places. The 2nd hand written report seems to be by Serino. Mentions the resident as the person who confronted the deceased.

      • looneydoone says:

        manberk ,
        yep, and from whom did ME Examiner, Tara Malphurs get this information for her report ?

      • manberk says:

        Yeah, looks like that hand written note is Malphurs. Same hand writing as her other reports. She was on the scene, and she says she was advised by the POC, who she IDed as Serino. That happened early and independent of GZ interviews with investigators later. Her report also has TM standing when being shot, and then falling. Interesting stuff. I missed those comments previously.

      • Malisha says:

        HAHAHAHAHA, good catch, Looneydoone, good catch, Manberk. HA HA HA!!

        The cops who couldn’t do corruption straight!

  19. colin black says:

    An I forgot to answer Xena
    I dont know if it will be offered in evidence.
    Because of his ommision
    Also if it is allowed in will the omission of his phonecall he is shown with cell phone pressed to his right recently battered ear.
    Will he be asked to explain whom he called an what he said.

    The one an only refrence I hear him make about a cell phone .
    In his first ofical written an recorded inter veiw .
    Same night of the shooting
    Was that he requested to call his wife an the officer whom had him in cuffs refused/
    Wanted to do a Dog the Bounty style chat I suppose with the cop holding the phone to his battered ear.

    Anyway phone call to wife deneied
    But one of the many residents whom flocked to the spot after the tragedy had finnished.Or the on start off another tragedy was about to begin.
    A conserted effort by powere that be in Sandford .
    Conspired to make Trayvons MURDER go away .
    Never even happened it was self defence by a sqeaky clean Merican…

    Someone cant remeber whon foggen claims offered to make the call to his wife.

    Relays the messege to Shellie that her husband just shot someone.
    Or words to that effect.
    No where have I heard hom questioned or answer about whom he called an why an what he said. on this call documented by snap happy Jon.

    Cause its one of the many things he left out about events that night.

    An yet more proof if any were needed that he just makes crap as he goes along about that night.

    • Malisha says:

      Another thing.

      Fogen alleged that when Trayvon asked him if there was a problem (“Homie”), he tried to get his cell phone out to dial 911 but he left it in the wrong pocket. By that description, one would expect that after the shooting, his cell phone was still residing in that mysterious “wrong pocket” because he still has not said he reached for his cell phone to call either 911 OR his wife. Or anybody else. Had he done so, of course, there would be another issue: Whose DNA was on HIS cell phone by the time he used it for any purpose after the killing of Trayvon Martin? We do know that Fogen was allowed to “wash up” without any police escort at the station house (!) so we don’t know what was on his hands at the time, but if he grabbed his own cell phone at any point there should be some indication on that cell phone.


      • Manberk says:

        In his very first interview with Singleton I think he says he got his phone out. It morphed into his story of just going for it later.
        (-Similarly to the way his need for a street sign later became an address, when he probably realized that’s wouldn’t fly being the street he lived on.) Who would ever believe he would hide his phone in the wrong pocket when he says he always puts in the same place, while scared, in the dark with no light, and with the cops supposed to call him momentarily?! Like all his other bunk, unbelievable.

        Follow the lies. Innocent people don’t have so much to cover with them.

      • If not on the cell phone or in addition to it, I would examine the interior lining of all of his pockets for trace evidence transferred from his hands.

    • Malisha says:

      Osterman said that Shellie called HIM and said “George shot somebody else.” Hmmm…

  20. Lady2Soothe says:

    Whoops… *Psychology* not Phycology (as usual, thought I’d checked everything)

    • leander22 says:

      Lady2Soothe, the criminal returning to the crime scene, as far as I know, seems to based on Dostoevsky’s character Raskolnikov (Crime and Punishment). That Burgess appeared on the crime scene a couple of days later, which strictly would fit the idea, seems to have to do with the fact he lived there.

  21. Lady2Soothe says:

    We’ve all heard of the criminal returning to the scene of the crime.

    Phycology question: What was fogen’s motive for returning so quickly and calmly to the scene of his crime?

    Was he thumbing his nose at society?
    Was it the thrill of seeing his deed in the daylight?
    Was it being able to relive the excitement of the night before?
    Was it because someone, anyone was finally willing to listen to him?
    Did he finally feel important strutting down the pathway where he’d always been unnoticed before?
    Did he see himself as a hero walking through the complex with neighbors peeking out their windows?
    Did he expect a parade in his honor with people showering him with adoration and throwing roses at his feet?
    Was it because he thought he was now going to be considered “one of Sandford’s finest”?

    Of course none of us will truly ever know fogen’s intentions but just why did he want to return so quickly and why was he so calm?

    Or was it because ___________ ? I’d really like to know what everyone else thinks, or for those who have studied this subject what their findings were as to why criminals, especially this criminal returned to the scene of the crime.

    Thanks in advance to everyone responding

    • Xena says:

      Serino insisted on getting a re-enactment asap. As we see, GZ thought he was going to sit in the car and tell what happened. Effectively, even after getting out of the car, he didn’t re-enact but told about the altercation. He should have gotten on the ground and showed — not told.

      • Jun says:

        I feel the cops were crafty here because they knew that GZ’s story was not working and GZ realized at the scene he had to tell another story, and this one involved flailing tigerswipes for about 3 feet south of the T

        • Xena says:

          @Jun. You know, I need to read Serino’s drafts again. What I did read made me wonder why he did not include the inconsistencies with the NEN call and GZ’s story and re-enactment. An additional concern is that he did not include that Trayvon could not have appeared out of no where at the “T” because not only is there nothing to hide behind, but his body was found about 40 ft south of where GZ said the altercation took place.

          And why oh why do they continue to forget that GZ asked that the cops call for his location?

    • Malisha says:

      The “re-enactment” was arranged by the detective. When he said he wanted Fogen to go do it the next day, Fogen at first said he worked until 5 and then said that he had class that evening, at 6. When Serino questioned him about the class, Fogen gratuitously lied, saying he already had earned an associate’s degree in criminal justice and now was working on a bachelor’s! He just says anything that he thinks makes HIM look better, giving you an idea about why he would have said the various lies he indulged in, all along. At every stage, without regard to whether it even logically fits, he lies about how good he is and how bad everybody else is. Very VERY immature and shows enormous psychological AND cognitive deficits. And Junior’s really not much different, only a bit more polished and obviously much more rehearsed, at the point of the early comments given by Fogen when he thought nobody would ever see them except the cops controlled by his allies, Wolfinger and Lee.

    • Malisha says:

      But look at those tiger-swipes, and remember, “I stumbled; I think I tried to push him off me,” Huh? It would have taken a lot less effort to pull your damn gun and say: “STAND BACK AND SHOW ME YOUR HANDS OR I’LL SHOOT”


      “I think I tried to push him off me,” dumb, dumb, dumb.

  22. colin black says:

    Xena says:

    January 12, 2013 at 8:45 pm

    I would like opinions on whether GZ’s omission about Jon taking the photo of the back of his head will come up at trial? Associated with that questions and any answers is whether that photo might not be admitted into evidence because of GZ’s omission

    Im not sure what you mean Xena.
    Has fogen or Jon ever claimed he even knew the photo was being snapppped.
    Has Jon ever stated foristance he asked me to take a snap of the blood on the back of his head,
    I dont know.
    Is this the same guy foggen asked .
    Is there any bloood on me?

    Could be claimed might even be true that foggen didnt even know Jon was snap happy with his phone in the background.
    Would he want to willingly document himself makeing a call on a cellular phone forinstance.
    Wich is another peice of information he left out in his officiall statements any many many variations on how events .
    Unfolded that dark stormy night.

    • Xena says:

      Yes Colin, GZ leaves many things out. I tend to think that the photo is associated with how the key chain flashlight was found close to the T — where GZ was seen walking after killing Trayvon. In all his statements, GZ does not mention dropping either flashlight.

      There’s something up with that. It’s my hope that if GZ does take the stand and that photo is entered into evidence, that the prosecution asks him when it was taken, why it was taken, and why he failed to mentioned it.

  23. colin black says:

    colin black says:

    January 12, 2013 at 8:56 pm

    Thnx Pat am fan dab a dozi wthi that
    Thats a Scotish word you wont be familiar with.

    Thnx Xena an Prof…


  24. whoops start at the bottom and read up. piers never answered back!

    also notice how he flat out lies again and said the tox report is not in!!

  25. i hope you guys can understand this. it’s JR desperate for attention from Piers Morgan during the last hour or two on Twitter.

    now shrink this!!

    Robert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr

    Amber Jade‏@Justice4Amer
    @rzimmermanjr @jonathanwald @PiersTonight He won’t do it because he knows you are right!
    Retweeted by Robert Zimmerman Jr View conversation

    12mRobert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr
    StillNO Tox rpt made public>“@huntnfishgirl: RUtalkingGZ? Maybe TM was paranoid he was high that night right? @Animaljunkie @rzimmermanjr”

    24mRobert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr
    @jonathanwald @PiersTonight @DLoesch If criminals in UK “don’t have access2 guns”-Who Commited those UK Gun murders?! HINT: Criminals w/guns

    30mRobert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr
    @jonathanwald @PiersTonight If Piers is so confident that gunsR so inaccessible, send me2 UK: I’ll have access2 a gun w/in a week; GAME ON

    Robert Zimmerman Jr‏@jonathanwald @PiersTonight If Piers is so confident that gunsR so inaccessible, send me2 UK: I’ll have access2 a gun w/in a week; GAME ON

    32mRobert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr
    @PiersTonight U’ve met me, U should know I’m a man of my word..Send me2 UK & I’ll have access2 a gun in 1Week! (PutUR$whereURmouthIS)

    37mRobert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr
    @PiersTonight Robert #Zimmerman here, Open challenge: @piersmorgan send me2 UK, I’ll have access2 a gun in a week..Care2 take me up? Uthere?

    @PiersTonight This is Robert #Zimmerman: If @piersmorgan will send me 2 UK, I’ll have a gun in ONE week.. It’s a guarantee. GameON

    Robert Zimmerman Jr‏@rzimmermanjr
    @WashingtonDCTea @michellemalkin @PiersTonight An open challenge @piersmorgan send me2 UK: I’ll have the means2 procure a gun in 1 week.

    • seallison says:

      That could be Fogen himself. The Twitter account apparently belongs to the whole herd of Zzzzzs. Junior seems to have moved passed his baby brothers plight. When someone discusses the case, the tone changes and the rants (attacks) are just totally nuts – more than usual.

      • that is jr! he doesn’t really like talking about gz anymore, and jr wouldn’t let gz steal his personal *perceived glory* basking in the attentions of piers morgan! jr met piers NOT gz! Jr is the star of HIS story!

      • leander22 says:

        that is jr! he doesn’t really like talking about gz anymore,

        that may be a PR decision. I initially thought somebody only defended GZ since he feared consequences for gun owners. NRA member for life.

        I suggest an alternative: New York, Connecticutt and New Jersey might consider seceding from the Union.

        You surely can gain a larger support base by concentrating on the gun law angle or alternatively the constitution. Especially if you occasionally suggest that GZ had to defend his life but don’t concentrated too much on the specifics of the case. Defending your life triggers the right type of imagery anyway in uninformed minds. Notice in the above dialog he may well allude to criminals to enforce an image he wants and needs without directly alluding to Trayvon. He is a lawyer after all, and doing it directly may have consequences.

        Oh well, Michelle Malkin. Haven’t heard from extremist for quite some time.

    • Xena says:

      HA! The psychology behind the man — Junior says that he will break the law if it means proving someone who disagrees with him is wrong. Kinda like his brother, uh?

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Very insightful, Xena.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:


      • Two sides to a story says:

        Or banned from getting a visa. The Brits don’t like that kinda talk.

        • PiranhaMom says:


          BobZim is simply e-casting himself as GunNut Smokesperson, recognizing that IttyBittyBro GZ is yestiddy’s story that’s NOT BRINGING IN ANY DOUGH.

          A wise student commented a few weeks back that GZ would have raised zero bux if he hadn’t used a gun on Trayvon. If he bashed him with a baseball bat would contributors have sent in $230,000? Naaaah.

          So BobZumser is bailing out on bro, hoping to capture support (i.e., cash) from gun suupporters.

          He’s desperate to stay in the limelight. But the Limeys won’t let him in, based on this stunt.

        • Xena says:

          The Brits don’t like that kinda talk.

          @Two sides. The more Junior talks, the more he puts himself on the radar. Maybe that’s what he’s hoping for so he can stop living like a vagabond and have a permanent home in a prison cell.

      • leander22 says:

        That’s not his point. He tries to create a division between the “good citizen” owning a gun and criminals. It’s about gaining a bigger support base, I think. That’s helpful imagery in the larger media strategy. I’d appreciate a link to the interview.

        I don’t understand are you alluding to a recent interview. Any chance to watch it?

        There are two brothers, is Robert the one that was in the army. We do we never hear from the other brother. I seem to remember there was another one.

      • leander22 says:

        Oh, didn’t notice before that Piranha Mom agrees with me. I am pleased Piranha. 😉

        Xena, he is not suggesting he wants to commit a crime, he is simply suggesting how easy it would be even in a country with strict gun laws to get one.

        Unfortunately that is true, if you join a gun club or are a hunter for sports, it’s really easy to get one over here in Germany too.

      • leander22 says:

        how easy it would be even in a country with strict gun laws to get one.

        OK, the hunters and members of a gun association may not really what he alludes to. But yes he may be right, if you find the right red-districts or the larger criminal scene, you may well be able to get one over here too. The red light district wouldn’t be a bad place to start looking for one. But I am no expert on matters. And I think generally our murder rates are much lower. Although we lately have the type of school shootings too. As far as I remember one was a member of such a gun association. Complex matters.

      • SpecialladyT says:

        Xena, I have some information to forward to you. Please respond and let me know how to get it to you.

        • Xena says:

          Xena, I have some information to forward to you. Please respond and let me know how to get it to you.

          I sent an email to the address you used when commenting on Blackbutterfly7.

    • PiranhaMom says:

      @Shannon –

      This is just another pitch by GRIFTERS LTD – BobZimster’s con-of-the-month, trying to weasel two tix (First Class, right?) for two NYC-LON (BobZimsxtexrx xxX+XX xhisx pubxlixcixst

    • Jun says:

      The tox report already concluded that Trayvon was not on drugs that night

      and now Junior wants to buy guns in the UK LOL

      It just sounds like Junior is trying to get a free trip to the UK, on top of his smear campaign of Trayvon

    • Mike says:

      is robert zimmerman sr insinuating that he is a criminal capable of committing a felony in the uk. ;p

    • PiranhaMom says:

      @ Shannon,

      That’s just BobZimster (CEO of GRIFTERS, UNLTD.) trying to weasel 2 TIX NYC-LON out of Piers Morgan for BobZim + his publicist. Plus hotel suite, intro to the Royals, etc – ya’ know, peeps on BobZim’s level …

      Geez,this guy is a regular Kardashian. I can’t say “without the boobs” because the whole Zimster family are boobs.

    • Jun says:

      LOL did he just say “You’ve met me, you know I am a man of my word” LMAO

      I think Piers knows that he is not a man of his word LMAO

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @ Jun –

        I disagree with you that RobZim is not a man of his word.

        He IS a man of his word.

        That word is “flatulence.”

    • PYorck says:

      I am not sure what he has in mind. Either he is offering to commit a crime for a bet or he is playing a stupid game because Piers Morgan did not specify which kind of gun. UK regulations for shotguns up to two shots are relatively lax and he might really be able to get a visitor’s licence.

      Of he is mostly just attention whoring and Morgan is a good target because he easily gets defensive on Twitter.

      • Malisha says:

        This is like high school boys (not the serious kind who want to be aeronautical engineers, either, just the immature kind who want to be bigshots before they even take their college boards) talking about how cool they are. OMG when I see this kind of talk coming from someone in the public eye, I wonder what has happened to the normal human emotion of embarrassment. Junior is saying that if somebody else buys HIM a ticket for HIM to make a trip to England, HE will be able to buy a gun in England in a way that violates English law? Oh my my my MY, how very daring and how much a “man of [his] word” he must actually be! How could anybody have doubted him or his conclusions or his opinions for a single moment? He is obviously entitled to opine on the truth or falsity of anything said by anyone in the world at any time!

        Why didn’t all the developing countries of the world get rid of all their problems and simply hire Junior for a few million bucks to give them all the answers? He’s obviously a “man of his word” and he obviously can DO anything and KNOWS everything. Silly countries, struggling to get on their feet without using a renewable resource accessible on Twitter.

        • He was probably drunk when he made the boast and we already know he is a racist not very intelligent.

          He shames himself every time he opens his mouth or hops on twitter.

          “Step away from the keyboard!”

  26. PiranhaMom says:

    @ Malisha
    @ Professor Fred

    Because Jon’s picture of the back of GZ’s head and the time proximity to the murder, it puts the lie to Fogen’s claim that he was lying on his back in the grass when he shot Trayvon. No smeared head from the rough, wet St. Augustine’s grass. Blows up Fogen’s whole stupid alibi.

    If the defense does not enter the photo, can the prosecution do so?

    Could the defense then object to it being admitted (because it is so damning to Fogen), based on the lack of control from phonecam to computer to FDLE?

    And was Jon’s wife ever interviewed? He said she saw the ruckus. If interviewed, what Witness# is she?

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      That photo with no smeared blood on the back of his head certainly does prove that gz was NOT lying on his back when he shot Trayvon. It actually proves the opposite.

      And, it is also supported by the photo taken at the police station. In the police station photo the lines of blood still can be seen.

      Both are very important pieces of evidence.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Jon’s wife is witness 12.

    • blushedbrown says:


      wrote in part:

      And was Jon’s wife ever interviewed? He said she saw the ruckus. If interviewed, what Witness# is she?

      Jonathan Manolo = witness 13 (took the 3 photos)married to witness 12 Jeannie
      Johnathan G = witness 6 (recanted mma style) married to witness 17 Amanda
      Jermey W. = witness 20 married to witness 11 Jennifer L

      all were interviewed.

      Hope this helps…..

    • “If the defense does not enter the photo, can the prosecution do so?”


      “Could the defense then object to it being admitted (because it is so damning to Fogen), based on the lack of control from phone cam to computer to FDLE?”

      They can object, but I think the objection will go to weight rather than admissibility.

    • nancybenefiel says:

      IMHO the flow of the blood trickles indicates that GZ was sitting on top of Trayvon Martin, leaning over the kid. This would cause the blood to trickle down and slightly forward. It would also be consistent with the testimony of witness 18 who said she saw GZ sitting on tp of Trayvon Martin before the shot Trayvon, as he shot Trayvon and as he stood up and stepped away.

      • lurker says:

        It strikes me that perhaps that back of head injury is only marginally related to the altercation. Suppose that when George reached Retreat View Circle, having lost sight of Trayvon, he turned right and went down the sidewalk in front of the houses. Now suppose Trayvon had ducked between his dad’s townhouse and the one immediately north of it–either to hide or to cut to the back and go in by way of the patio. George spots him and they both move quickly through the bushes (even though the shrubs close to the t are to short to hide behind as George suggests at one point, I believe that those between the buildings further down are taller and more tree-like. The back of head abrasion could easily be a scrape from a branch, particularly if the foliage had briars of some kind. The blood would flow initially downward, but once Zimmerman was atop Trayvon and leaning forward, it would flow in the direction of the ears and chin (as shown in the photos). This kind of wound would account for the straight line at the top. Just a theory, but I think it fits the facts well.

    • Malisha says:

      That’s the most significant problem with the photo taken by Jon at the scene a few minutes after the killing of Trayvon Martin. Remember, it did not first appear in any of the regular evidence dumps, it first appeared during those early days when a million people were in the streets calling for the arrest of Fogen (not even specifying a charge) and Fogen’s family had not even geared up for the “Fogen is a Saint” campaign and the only folks speaking about Fogen were his father and the two bozo lawyers who both bailed the day they figured he went on the lam. And how did it appear? It was “received” by ABC News. A very short time later it was shown to O’Mara and he was asked for HIS comment (after he was retained) and he said words to the effect of, “I don’t know if OR HOW the defense is going to use that photograph.”

      Weird comment. He did NOT say, “that proves my client’s case.” He did NOT say, after Corey charged Fogen with Murder [although Dershowitz sure did, while trying to fit both of his feet into his mouth at the same time], that the charge should not have been murder in view of that terrible photograph showing the horrible things done to his poor client. He started to concentrate on “nose nose nose nose” whenever people talked about the actual events that night.

      To my way of thinking, this is one of three big big BIG problems for the defense. This picture of the back of Fogen’s head is one of the three big problems; the fact that Trayvon Martin did not have banged-up knuckles is another big problem; and the third big problem is that the bullet went into Trayvon Martin’s body at “no angle” at intermediate range while it traveled through Trayvon Martin’s hoodie at point blank range at an angle leaving powder burns or traces behind. I believe these things are insurmountable. Oh wait wait, there’s also the fact that although voice analysts may not be able to attribute the screams to Trayvon Martin, they CAN rule out Fogen’s lying throat from being the source of those chilling screams.

      • Judy75201 says:

        I love your posts and language usage. Your “both feet” comment was grand!

      • nancybenefiel says:

        At some point Z said he slipped and fell on the wet grass. Austin (the boy walking his dog) saw him alone on the ground.He probably banged his nose and scratched his head then. This was before Z found Trayvon. In the pictures supposedly taken right before or immediately after the cops arrived all of the small amount of blood there was had dried. This would not have been the case if he had received the injuries immediately before and their severity forced him to kill Trayvon. It makes no sense. Of course nothing Z says makes sense
        Whatever happened earlier in the way of a fight seems irrelevant to me. By the time he chose to shoot Trayvon, he was sitting on top of the boy, gun drawn, in total control of the situation, in no danger. I don’t see how anyone could logically claim this murder was self defence

    • nancybenefiel says:

      That photo with the blood trickling down the back of Z’s head corroborates W18’s statement of seeing him sitting on top of TM just before he fired his gun. The blood starts with that weird straight line and trickles down and slightly forward. That exactly matches 18’s descriptions.
      I have another question though. W18 describes GZ as sitting calmly on top of TM, in complete control. gun held at TM’s chest. I’m not a lawyer, but as I understand the self defence plea, it requires that there be imminent danger. Once the fight is over, the winner does not have a right to just shoot the loser. GZ was holding TM down with his body and his gun. According to W18 there was not fighting, hiting, or bashing going on, just Trayvon screaming “I’m begging you” The police were 20 seconds away. They could undoubtedly hear the sirens. IMHO there are two reasons for GZ to shoot the kid. He was so angry he could not restrain himself, which does not fit anyone’s description, or he wanted to make darned sure Trayvon nevr gota chance to talk to the cops. This would also explain his weird act of turning TM over and sitting on him. He needed to be certain the boy was dead.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Could a fleeing accomplice or other neighbor have swatted at Fogen’s head while he was atop the boy with the gun out? My take on the cuts and the nosebleed is that they started very close in time to when Fogen pulled the trigger. Could Fogen have been in some kind of killer’s rapture and not even felt it as some one tried to physically dissuade him from shooting the boy?

        • The teacher (W18) was watching and did not see that happen.

          • nancybenefiel says:

            Everyone who actually knew Trayvon had only good things to say about him. None of his “troubles” at school indicated “violent tendencies”, just teenage stuff. We’ve certainly heard p It’s been nearly a year since the boy’s death. I think if he’d been going around instigating fights, we would have heard by now.We’ve certainly heard enough about Z’s beating people up. But it shouldn’t matter. Z had no reason to suspect TM of wrongdoing at that point in time.. In this country one can walk around and look at anything they please. IMHO Z was in a foul mood. He wasn’t going grocery shopping. He had no money. He probably had a fight with Shellie and went to his truck to fume.He was behind in his rent, his car payments and he was on the verge of getting kicked out of school. Seeing TM walking by nearly dancing (that’s how his mom said he walked when he was happy), smiling, chatting with his girlfriend ticked GZ off. The expletives he used in the NEN call were totally inappropriate, and indicated a level of anger TM had done nothing to incite. He just wanted to get away from this “creepy guy”. GZ was furious when TM ran away from him. Then while chasing this kid, making sure he didn’t get away GZ slipped banged his nose and scratched his head. Now he was past livid. as the best man at his wedding said “when George loses it, people get hurt.” This time someone got killed. GZ knew when he got that gun that he had anger issues that he couldn’t control. IMHO they should put him away for as long as they legally can.

  27. Jun says:

    Here everything fairly simple

    (1) Does Trayvon’s strange allegations from Fogenhatters and cult regarding selling a joint or writing on twitter prove what happened that night? It does not prove anything that happened that night and there is no evidence of any of these allegations and Fogenhats has 10000 times worst history and is actually a history filled with violence and bullying

    (2) Does Fogenhats mere suspicion of Trayvon give him authority and justification to stalk and terrorize the boy and obstruct Trayvon’s liberty to walk home at his own free will and liked pace? No it does not

    (3) Was Fogenhats acting irresponsibly and depraved? Yes he was. He should have known not to stalk and terrorize people in the dark of the night and also not expect people to be apprehensive about complete strangers stalking them angrily, just as Fogenhats did to Trayvon. Fogenhats also took away Trayvon’s liberty by acting in an aggressive manner by questioning his right to freely walk home with Skittles and Candy. Trayvon asked a simple question and it is depraved to attack the boy for that, on top of terrorizing, threatening and killing the boy.

    (4) Is there proof to contradict Fogenhats’ assertion that he walked back to his truck? There’s no proof that the defendant ever did such a thing, that is walk back to his truck.

    (5) Fogenhats suffered a broken nose though? There’s no scientific proof he had a broken nose, there’s no DNA on the victim’s hands to prove scientifically that the victim ever touched the defendant at all, and you can’t expect friendly responses to Fogenhats stalking and terrorizing kids and then grabbing and getting on them out of the blue after chasing and confronting them.

  28. Xena says:

    I would like opinions on whether GZ’s omission about Jon taking the photo of the back of his head will come up at trial? Associated with that questions and any answers is whether that photo might not be admitted into evidence because of GZ’s omission.

    • His omission should not affect admissibility.

      • Xena says:

        What about the chain of custody? Do you think that the photo taken by Jon can be objected to by the prosecution and if so, on what basis?

      • nancybenefiel says:

        IMHO the “enhanced” photo should be helpful to the prosecution for several reasons. First the straight line the blood makes at the top looks like it was caused by some kind of cap. Next the amount of blood on Z’s face in that photo shows no relation to the kind of nosebleed Z described. It looks to me like Z injured himself when he slipped and fell and then went somewhere to wash the blood off his face and hands, leaving the hat there. This had to have happened before he even made contact with Trayvon and so would prove yet again that Trayvon could not have caused Z’s booboos Last the nose looks so faked. I assume the jury will see all of the mugshots taken a couple of hours earlier, unless they are blind they will notice that in no other picture does Z have a weidly wide nose and an emaciated elongated face. It looks like a different guy.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Jon’s (Witness 13’s) words gave us the BEST picture of gz.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        W13 tells us, “he said, ‘just tell her I shot somebody’ like it was nothing.”

        I can find the exact quote if anyone needs it.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Veaudry: When he asked you to call his wife and he made the statement, “Just tell her I shot somebody,” how would you describe that? …his voice at that time?
        W13: Like, “Just quick get to the point,” type… type talk. And like… almost like he just did it. You know, it’s like… not like he was in shock or anything. Not like, “I can’t believe I just shot someone.” It was more like, “Just tell my wife I shot somebody.” Like… like it was nothing.

      • Xena says:

        @Yahtc, would that be the words alone the lines that GZ acted like killing a person was nothing?

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Xena, Witness 13 words give a snapshop of gz….. gz seemed to act like killing someone was no big deal.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        One week after the Veaudry interview of Witness 13, de la Rionda interviewed Witness 13:

        W13: As I was explaining to his wife what had happened, he just blurted out, “Just tell her I shot someone.”
        De la Rionda: Okay. What was his demeanor? Was he crying? or how would you describe it?
        W13: Out of breath. When you, you know, when he… when he was telling me he was a little bit more just kinda like, “Get to the point.” type…
        De la Rionda: Just a matter of fact, not a big deal. W13: Yeah. De la Rionda: Okay. Is that how you took it? W13: Yes.
        De la Rionda: Okay. So, it was just like a matter of fact. Like, you know, yeah, tell her I shot somebody.
        W13: Yes.

      • Lady2Soothe says:

        I’ve found it interesting and have yet to hear/read anyone address the casual way he spoke to that *someone*. Not just the tone but the familiarity, like it was someone he knew intimately enough to have his phone wife’s phone number.

      • Malisha says:

        What is most significant to me in this description of Fogen’s behavior right after killing Trayvon Martin is not that he told the neighbor to deal with it “as if it was nothing,” but that he gave the piece of information “I shot someone.” If I were Fogen at the scene of that in-ci-dent at the time the witness was there, right after the in-ci-dent was over, I might have said, “Please call my wife; tell her I got attacked but I’m all right; I had to shoot the guy.”

        Fogen was aware he shot somebody. He wasn’t even beginning to formulate the self-defense claim yet; he knew his buddy Tim Smith was either there already or on the way; he knew he could smooth it over with the cops and there was no problem on that count; what he did NOT know was whether Shellie already was notified that he shot someone.

        He didn’t begin to look at this as a “self-defense claim” until his interview with Singleton. If the only cop he had to speak with was Tim Smith, with whom he spoke in the squad car, he wouldn’t have had to make anything up at all. He’d have winked, said “I had to do it,” and that would have been a wrap. SERINO sent word that he wanted Singleton (from DRUGS!) to interview Fogen as soon as he reached the station house; that’s why Fogen had to make up a story. Otherwise, no problem, no story, no nothing. Wash up and go home to wifey.

      • nancybenefiel says:

        My favourite Z quote comes from the best man at his wedding. “George is a great guy to have a beer with, but if he loses it people get hurt”. If this is what your friends say……

    • nancybenefiel says:

      One thing that really bothers me about the photo of the back of TM.s head is the way the blood forms a straight line across the top.Blood just doesn’t do tha naturallt. It looks as if GZ had something like a baseball cap on at the time he acquired those scratches. Also the “bloody” picture of the front of his face shows very little blood, not normal for a nosebleed. It. looks to me as if Gz went someplace after he slipped and fell, in order to clean himself up and left the bloodstained cap there.. This would mean he got the “injuries” before he ever confronted Trayvon. Has this ocurred to anyone else or am I off the wall with it?

      • Xena says:


        One thing that really bothers me about the photo of the back of TM.s head is the way the blood forms a straight line across the top.Blood just doesn’t do tha naturallt.

        I think you mean GZ’s head. Yes, the blood going across is weird and I agree with you. IMO, those boo-boo’s were acquired a day if not two days before 2/26/12. IMO, his reason for getting on Trayvon’s back was to slip his hand around onto Trayvon’s wound and get blood on his hands to apply to make his boo-boo’s appear fresh. If you look at the pattern of the blood, it looks like an application and then running the fingers through it. Actually, I counted 5 lines going down in lengths that could be the same as fingers.

        I even experimented by using shampoo and naturally running my fingers through dry hair. Naturally, my fingers went down the same pattern as the blood on the back of GZ’s head.

      • sdunn5 says:


      • nancybenefiel says:

        Xena I think that picture is really important. For the blood to trickle down as it did GZ had to be sitting up and leaning slightly forward. Exactly the way witness18 describes him seconds before he shot TM. I forget some of the evidence at times (there’s just so much) but did I miss something from the lab report? I thought the only presence of TM’s DNA in Z was a bit on the front of his jacket. I know that TM’s chest wound bled very little because once the heart stops the blood doesn’t move. So when people are killed instantly there is usually very little blood

      • nancybenefiel says:

        Xena, the only drop of GZ’s blood found on TM’s body was on the back of his hoodie. It probably got there when Z sat on Trayvin’s back, making sure he was dead.

        • Xena says:

          There was also a stain of GZ’s blood on the bottom hem of Trayvon’s sweatshirt under his hoodie. I don’t know the significance of having one stain on Trayvon’s hoodie and another on the hem of his sweatshirt. However, I do think there is some significance of Trayvon’s blood being on the bag of Skittles in his pocket, and it’s my suspicion that it got there by GZ transferring it from Trayvon’s chest then frisking Trayvon’s dead body.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: