Skip to main content

View Diary: Zimmerman Jury Selection Begins (118 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What makes you think Zimmerman was punched? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    amsterdam, libnewsie, Tonedevil

    Zimmerman certainly has had his story to tell.

    What evidence have you seen, other than Zimmerman yakking away, that he was punched?

    He claims Trayvon broke his nose. But no Zimmerman blood was found on Trayvon's sleeves. EMS guys did not see a broken nose. And so on.

    I'll wait to see what evidence comes in.

    I think that in the last moments of Trayvon's life, Trayvon was sitting there, facing a man with a gun, and Trayvon was screaming, a long and anguished scream, before Zimmerman pulled the trigger.

    What I'd like to see in the trial is the introduction of some evidence that gives us a clearer and truer picture of what happened in those few minutes of a young man's life--not the story of a man trying to talk his way out of trouble.

    •  EMTs who treated him say his nose looked broken (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      True North

      The two EMTs and Paramedic who cleaned up and  assessed Zimmerman's wounds gave statements under oath that they thought his nose was broken and his wounds were significant enough to require stitches:

      FDLE Interview by David Lee of Firefighter/EMT Kevin O'Rourke
      1:45
      Q: Can you give me a narrative of what occurred?

      A: He talks about going to scene and treating Trayvon Martin first. After they determine there's nothing they can do for him they are told there is another patient in the back of a police car.
      go to 3:15
      "we treated him for ah for 1 or 2 lacerations on back of the head and what looked to be a, ah, fractured nose and we cleaned the blood off of his head and face ... and we treated him as best we could and once the bleeding was under control we left him with the SPD and we backed out of the scene and we went home."
      7:14
      Q: As far as Mr. Zimmerman's treatment what specfically did you do?

      A: "What did I do?  If I remember correctly I was ah getting the gauze you know pouring hydrogen peroxide on gauze and giving it to Stacey who was cleaning and I was assisting her in cleaning the wounds."
      9:35
      Q: Can you give a description of what he was wearing?

      A: "A shirt and jeans I guess. I mean I don't remember exactly. A shirt and jeans. I know he had, he was covered in a pretty significant amount of blood.  I can tell you that, and it took a little while to clean him up."
      FDLE Interview of Stacey Livingston
      Same as O'Rourke, she begins her narrative starting from the time she arrived on the scene and what they did to Trayvon.
      4:44 Begins talking about Zimmerman -
      5:20 "Leaning forward he kind of had blood going you know on his face and we just started to clean him up to see what his injuries were.  Um and it looked like he could very well possibly had like a broken nose.  His nose was bloody and swollen. Um cleaned off the back of his head. Because some of the blood had dried so we kind of had to  get it off to see what he actually had. And he had two small maybe an inch like lacerations on the back of his head.  One looked a little deeper than the other but um we just cleaned him off with sterile water and stuff and tried to get him to stop bleeding and um the police officer that was standing there asked us you know does he need to be transported by ambulance?   And we just told him you know we'd be happy to take him. Looks like he may have a broken nose and could possibly need a stitch or two. And um I don't know how the determination was made but I know that we left and it was determined that the police were going to take him to see if he needed stitches.  And that was pretty much all..."
      FDLE Interview of Michael Brandy
      Arrived on scene pretty quick. Responsible for calling Trayvon's death based on heart monitor flat line. Once he made the call they left him the way he was and made their way out of that scene. There was nothing they could do.
      3:58

      Q: Did you treat the other gentleman there Mr. Zimmerman?


      A: "Yes I did...He was sitting in the police car and he was in handcuffs.  I asked officer if he could ah open the door and at least let him swing out so we could evaluate him. He did so. Um, basically just ah evaluate him. He had cuts and abrasions on his face and his nose (unintelligible) had some damage, and he had a cut on the back of his head and we basically just ah cleaned him up."
      4:28

      Q:Did he make any statements to you as to how he received his injuries?


      A: "No he didn't."

      Q: Did  he make any statements at all while you were there?

      A: "No. He was pretty quiet."
      Q: Once you treated Zimmerman what did you do after that?

      A: "...The wounds had stopped bleeding.  Told the officer there that he was going to need to go to the hospital probably and get some stitches.  And the officer said OK and I said do you want us to handle taking him or are you going to take him? He said we'll take him and that's basically all we did."



      5:58

      Q: Can you describe the wounds in detail that you saw on Mr. Zimmerman?  


      A: "He had a definite laceration to the back of the head....It was pretty big.  It was probably about an inch to at least 1/2 inch wide; it was a definite wound back there. He had some abrasions on his forehead. He had a kind of like a (unintelligible?) on his nose, maybe a little swollen. He had abrasions on cheeks and his face."
      6:55

      Q: Did you happen to examine his hands?  


      A: "He was in handcuffs the whole time.  He had blood on his arms and hands so we just kind of basically cleaned him off, took some peroxide and some gauze and just kind of cleaned off to make sure you know he didn't have anything else that wasn't seen and basically just washed his hands."
      I transcribed relevant portions of the audio files linked at the pages above.  Apologies for any weird formatting, don't have time to fix all the paragraph breaks.  
      •  O'Rourke is the driver of the emergency vehicle (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, True North

        he is not a paramedic and not qualified to make a diagnoses.
        The only paramedic that saw GZ that evening was Brandy.

        GZ had what appeared to be 2 puncture wounds on the tip of his nose and what looked like an abrasion near the bridge of his nose. What ever swelling there may have been, that had completely disappeared a couple of hours later, when his photos were taken at the police station.

        GZ refused to go to emergency that evening. The following day, his PA could not establish whether his nose was broken by manually examining his nose. He refused to see a TN specialist.

        •  listen to the audio (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          True North

          At the links provided are the audio statements of the two EMTs who cleaned up Zimmerman: O'Rourke and Livingston.  They tell the cop that it looks like he has a broken nose and that he might need stitches.  (This is probably where Zimmerman overhead them saying he broke his nose).  They offered to take him to the hospital but the cop said the SPD would take care of it.   Zimmerman didn't refuse the ambulance ride at that point. The cop refused it for him.  The cops later asked him a few times if he needed to go to the ER and he said no and that he wasn't sure what to do.  (I think this was in Serino's report and/or officer T. Smitb)

          I know the paramedics aren't qualified to make a diagnosis and that's why "broken nose" wasn't in the EMS report.  However, these people were all eyewitnesses at the scene and have probably taken numerous calls to bar fights or domestic violence situations where they have seen many broken noses.  This can all be established on the witness stand.   They will be allowed to offer their lay opinion based on their first hand exam of Zimmerman and their prior experiences and the jury can decide if they are believable or not.  

          Having some random person testify what they saw in a picture on the Internet is not going to be nearly as convincing as what the EMTs say and of course it's not going to be as convincing as a doctor holding up an xray showing the fracture lines.    So lets say the x-ray and the MD are 100% proof of broken nose.  Based on their stories I would give the EMTs a 75-80% chance of correctly assessing the broken nose and since two of them corroborate the same story the probability goes up to 90% (at least in my mind).  

          Lots of the facts in the case are going to turn this way.  In most instances you won't have that ironclad 100% proof of something that happened.   So you have to build the case where many facts and testimony add up together to get you closer to that 100%.  But it will never be perfect.  That's why the jury has a hard job to do.  

          Finally, why did the FDLE interview the Fire Dept. and ask their opinions of Zimmerman's injuries if the information wasn't relevant or dependable?

          •  When I read your... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            amsterdam

            statistical analyses of the likelihood of the EMTs being correct I realized where the old saying 67% of all statistics are made up on the spot came from.

            This makes about as much sense as Mike Huckabee on mescaline. - Prodigal 2-6-2008

            by Tonedevil on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 09:23:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I said that was in my mind (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tonedevil

              I'm not trying to define an absolute here.  What I mean to say is that you, and most importantly, every jury member is free to assign their own weight to the evidence and testimony on a scale that goes from 0 to 100% certainty.  
              If you have good reason to believe that the EMTs are lying and protecting Zimmerman - which can be elicited in cross-exam or via some other evidence - then the percentages obviously go down.  Maybe it was their first day on the job and they've never treated a patient in their life.  That would also lower their credibility IMO(!).

              I don't think the prosecution is going to spend a whole lot of time trying to discredit them because the value of confirming the nose was broken isn't going to decide the case one way or the other.  Again this is my opinion.  

              •  We definitely agree... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Demeter Rising, amsterdam

                I don't think the prosecution is going to spend a whole lot of time trying to discredit them if it gets to be an issue at all I would say something like 'how did you come to the conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman's nose was broken' is going to be the prosecutions question. That and maybe something about the recommendation for followup treatment.

                This makes about as much sense as Mike Huckabee on mescaline. - Prodigal 2-6-2008

                by Tonedevil on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 11:40:12 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  thanks (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tonedevil, amsterdam

            All of the comments here have been helpful.

            I saw the EMT report online, with nothing about a broken nose. i haven't listened to audio.

            Yep, they can come in and testify about what they saw, and their conclusions. Qualified paramedics can. It doesn't really matter what conclusions are drawn by a driver who isn't a qualified paramedic, no matter how many bar fights and broken noses he or she has seen.

            If paramedics are writing up a report at the scene of a violent death, I think they should include broken noses (or possible broken noses) in their written reports. They should also be assertive in telling the patient and the cops in whose care he is that he should go to ER forthwith, and note that in the report.

            You can't make them go, if they don't want to. I don't think the police should be questioning somebody until after he or she has been checked out by a doctor, if there is a possible broken bone.

            And, as we see in this case, some clarity on what the defendant's actual injuries were, as determined by a doctor, are beneficial for the course of justice.

          •  The EMTs already compromised their credibility... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tonedevil, amsterdam

            ...when Kevin O'Rourke testified at Zimmerman's bond hearing the Zimmerman's head was 45% covered in blood when pictures taken before the EMTs arrived show that such was clearly not the case.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site