search
top

New Video Appears in Zimmerman Case

From ABC News. Forgive the waste of taxpayer money that appears at the beginning of this video (looks like only the one on the ABC site has the Obamacare is great ad):

A few thoughts. People looking to jump to conclusions are saying this video shows that Zimmerman was uninjured. I don’t think it shows that at all. It shows he’s not badly injured, for sure, but the law doesn’t require you to get to the point you’re badly injured before defending yourself with deadly force. You just have to be in reasonable fear of grave bodily injury or death, and typically, getting your head beat into a pavement would qualify.

Now, back to what’s on the video. I think I notice a bandage on his nose, and what looks like a minor laceration on the back of his head. It’s hard to tell because they blur his face when it comes into view. It also looks like they blurred the back of his head for a second. But I agree with folks who note he’s steady on his feet. That would tend to indicate he didn’t receive major head trauma. But this does not negate his self-defense claim, unless the video shows he is totally uninjured. I don’t think it conclusively does.

Thirdly, if you’re ever involved in a self-defense situation where you’re even remotely injured, ask the police to take you to the hospital. Get examined by a doctor. Thanks to the wonders of malpractice suits, Doctors are far more careful than first responders, in terms of “Well, you know, he could have a concussion, we’d better keep him.” It’s also going to look far better, if this hits the paper, to be “released from the hospital” rather than “treated at the scene.” Doctors are also going to be more credible at characterizing your injuries, and can then testify on your behalf in court. It also buys you time for your lawyer to get down there.

21 Responses to “New Video Appears in Zimmerman Case”

  1. I did some still frames of this video… and some close looking. The cop checks Z’s head out pretty well, and in 2 pics from behind you can see really red skin, somewhat raised, consistent with being struck against the ground if not concrete…

    I posted it here https://twitter.com/#!/beepx22/media/slideshow?url=pic.twitter.com%2FF9n7oovL

    now im not an expert, and this really doesn’t mean anything besides armchair policing. but it did seem weird

    • Harold says:

      Here’s another frame shot plus an image enhancement which appear to show something; here’s further discussion in an earlier thread on the quality of the video, protocols for cleaning blood off of someone like Zimmerman, etc.

      • well thats 2 independent sources showing something.

      • Alpheus says:

        Whatever happened to the classic CSI technique of verbally telling the computer to “Zoom” and “Enhance” until we could see the very molecules that make up Zimmerman’s skin? If only we do that, we’d be able to see exactly what happened!

        What? Reporters don’t have access to that kind of technology? And neither do CSI departments? And computer experts say that such technology is mathematically impossible? What kind of world do we live in, one that’s dictated by the laws of physics and what engineers can do with them, or something?!?

  2. Ken Soderstrom says:

    Notice how ABC put their logo banner 1/4 of the way up from the bottom to cover the back of his head when he first gets out of the car?

  3. Stephen says:

    One thing about the “steady on his feet” comment … from what I saw on MSNBC last night this video was from 4 hours after the incident. That’s plenty of time to recover from all but a major concussion — as we all know from having played sports and etc.

    A month ago I fell on the ice and hammered the back of my head against a cement sidewalk. I wasn’t knocked unconscious but I totally had my “bell rung” (aka a concussion). Fortunately I was with a friend who helped me back to my vehicle and took me to the hospital, because for 30 minutes I wasn’t sure where I was or what was going on. I still don’t remember periods within that 30 minutes, but by the time I was being sutured up at the E.R. I pretty much had my thoughts together. 4 hours later I went out with some friends and family to a restaurant — I didn’t drive, but I felt fine.

    That 30 minutes was a scary time and I took one hell of a shot. Fortunately I didn’t have a cracked skull. But if I’d been delayed for 30 minutes at the site (i.e. while the police investigated me) I probably wouldn’t have felt I had to go to the ER just for the concussion because my thoughts had cleared. And even with my great insurance I had to pay $75 for the ER visit, which isn’t a huge burden to me, but if Zimmerman didn’t have insurance or worse insurance the cost may have been a big factor. In hindsight I’m sure he wishes he had, but at the time he’d just suffered a head injury and probably was just grateful to have his thoughts back together (assuming his tale is true, of course)

    This video really doesn’t change much, though I think it does tend to prove that he was at least injured.

    • Jake says:

      from what I saw on MSNBC last night this video was from 4 hours after the incident.

      Yet another thing the lying media happened to “forget” to mention (at least in all the stories about the video that I’ve seen).

      I did find the lack of a time and date stamp on a security video to be rather odd, but you can see where this was filmed off of a monitor and not the original video. The cameraman seemed to be trying very hard to keep Zimmerman towards the edge of the view throughout the video, and you can see at about 0:35 in where he accidentally let the date/time information area slip into view – but not so much that you can get any information from it.

      It’s just another malicious attempt by the MSM to twist the story.

      • Diane says:

        Here’s a much longer video (over 6 minutes) that shows a timestamp of 19:52 (and later). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzeHbibfmfU

        • Jake says:

          That time (about 20 minutes after the original dispatch) does seem more reasonable than 4 hours. It would be nice to see the time in the detective’s report, to verify that the camera’s clock was adjusted for DST and this didn’t happen an hour later (not uncommon with security cameras), but I suspect that it is correct.

          The quality isn’t any better, though. At most, the only new information we can get from it is the time and that the “sloppiness” I noted earlier is a little bit more sloppy than I thought (Zimmerman had a clear path to an exit door while the closest officer would have had to go around a parked motorcycle to get to him). Not that any escape attempt would have been very likely to succeed, but still… sloppy. If nothing else, if Zimmerman had tripped while restrained, there would have been no one in position to prevent him from landing on his face – one reason (of many) that cops normally will keep a hand on someone that’s cuffed while walking them somewhere.

          • Harold says:

            Speaking of “landing on [your] face” and Stephen’s start of this thread, a few years ago I did a hard faceplant onto pavement. I failed to correctly negotiate a street in the process of being resurfaced and my hands both had heavy bags so I couldn’t get them out in front in time. Made a three point landing, knee, elbow and face, and was knocked somewhat silly for a while. Not enough that I couldn’t pull myself and my bags to the median, but enough that my recovery time was measured in minutes, not seconds.

            I’d guess Zimmerman, who’s quite a bit younger than I, could have received less head trauma than I did, although more blows according to his account. His “having his thoughts together” by the time of this video does not strike me as improbable.

  4. GMC70 says:

    A commenter at Althouse said it best. Zimmerman is innocent – unless and until a jury determines otherwise. The rest of us, who get our information in dribs and drabs through a media with questionable agendas, and has demonstrated its unreliability time and again, have no business at this point taking a position.

    Only those who have direct access to the relevant information are in any position to make a valid judgement. And only a jury’s judgement (if it comes to that) matters. The rest of us, if rule of law is to matter, must accept that judgement as binding and just, even if we may personally disagree with it.

    And if it never gets to a jury, it will be because a prosecutor or a grand jury determined that there was not probable cause (the required legal standard) to take a case to trial.

    And that’s about all I can say about the matter.

    • Harold says:

      I think it’s OK to take contingent positions, i.e. “If this report of what Zimmerman said is true*, then as I understand the law blah blah.”

      * Where “true” is generally further qualified as with things like if the media report is correct (enough), if the more detailed account actually given to the police was credible, etc. etc.

      But you’re absolutely right that none of us should be making unqualified pronouncements on guilt or innocence, and it sure would be nice if people presumed innocence like our system generally does, outside of benighted localities like Ohio which “still requires a defendant to prove the elements of self-defense by a preponderance of evidence (more likely than not).

      • GMC70 says:

        Indeed. Especially if it helps folks actually understand the law, and how it operates in a particular set of facts.

        That is not what is going on, however. The media, and much of the public, and EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO SIGNED THAT PETITION CALLING FOR ARREST, should be ashamed of themselves.

  5. Jake says:

    On a side note, I am a bit surprised that the trailing officer let him walk behind that one motorcycle without following (and that he let him get that far ahead in the first place). Zimmerman may have been cooperative, but he was still handcuffed and in custody at that point. It seems… sloppy, and generally a bad idea.

  6. Stephen says:

    I looked over my DVR recordings from last night and didn’t see the label I remember saying “4 hours after” but I’m pretty sure I saw that label at some point. Can’t stomach re-watching their lousy shows and commentary.

    But 20 minutes later seems a bit short, doesn’t it? The police had to have handled the shooting scene first and then searched Zimmerman and driven to the station.

    Most minor concussions/head trauma you can come back from in less than 30 minutes. I had a fairly serious impact, but in any case I’m a couple decades older than Zimmerman.

  7. Stephen says:

    Fox news says 1-4 hours, and that the special prosecutor won’t clarify because it’s an ongoing investigation. I would still guess more than 20 minutes in any case.

  8. JayF says:

    Question I wish someone would ask of those who triumphantly claim that the video proves Zimmerman was uninjured:

    “The police report says that Zimmerman was injured and bleeding, so do you support prosecution of the responding officers for submitting a falsified report?”

    • Alpheus says:

      One thing the video proves, beyond reasonable doubt, was that Zimmerman was taken into custody, contrary to what everyone says.

      To hear the anti-Zimmerman rabble, you’d think that the police cleaned up Zimmerman, gave him a lollipop, and sent him home.

top