Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[curi0us]

Well, "Florida" doesn't have a police department. You posted a link establishing Celox is used in Gainesville. Gainesville is not Sanford.

Sure, but I was responding to you saying, "What information there is on the website about its use doesn't strike me as indicating it's very widespread in emergency medical services."

It is actually the Sanford Fire Department that treated Zimmerman on 2/26 so I didn't mean for the Gainesville reference to be proof of what the SFD had anyways. Knock yourself out trying to prove the SFD doesn't use Celox/quikclot if you want.

What, in your vast medical knowledge, tells you a relatively minor laceration would be one of those situations?

Do you have some "vast medical knowledge" yourself?

And yet a butterfly bandage apparently had no problem sticking to Zimmerman's head the next day. What do you imagine might have prevented one from sticking the night before?

Hair. Even very short hair like Zimmerman had on 2/26 can prevent a bandage from sticking properly. You have to use head wrap or shave some hair to properly bandage a wound within the hairline, for Zimmerman just shaving his head would have been a natural look for him so could have easily done that.

If you're going to cite "strong bleeding" you have a very narrow window with which to work. It would have to bleed enough to make it impossible for a bandage to adhere, but not enough to show any blood stains on his clothes in the surveillance video.

I didn't say this wound was a "strong bleeder", just that head wounds in general can have that feature which combined with the difficulty of sticking a bandage to a hair covered area makes me think celox is something that would be ideal for head lacerations.

What would also be helpful is if you could cite any of these things you're claiming with some actual documentation of medical procedures.

I cited an exact product with recommend use and then cited a news story of a police department in a nearby town using the same product three years ago. Not sure what else you want here.

Really? "Plausible" is what you're going with? I'll grant you "possible" but "plausible" seems like a stretch.

I will stick to my word choice of "plausible" but have no objection to you preferring "possible".

Honestly, this whole line of argument smacks of bias. Instead of coming up with a reasonable scenario to explain the facts (like, for instance, Zimmerman simply exaggerating his injuries) you're bending over backwards to come up with anything that will prove his claim true.

I'm not trying to prove his claim is true. I am just showing that it is plausible/possible.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

You're moving the goalpost. The reason the cement is important is because Zimmerman claims he was being pummeled against it when he shot. If they'd moved over to grass, he can't claim the same imminent grievous injury on grass.

Here's Zimmerman's father making this claim:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/george-z...-defense-version-of-trayvon-martins-shooting/

I trust GZ brother and father as little as TM parents. None of them were there.

I'm not trying to move any goalposts. It's plausible that they were half on, half off the grass. Or Started on the sidewalk and rolled to the grass.

This is GZ claim:
With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked him, then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law-enforcement authorities told the Orlando Sentinel.

ETA: I don't know where you got the claim you made above:
Zimmerman claims he was being pummeled against it when he shot.
If it's from the father, meh. See what I wrote about the all the parents.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Then how was the wound kept closed without aid of stitches or bandages?

The one theory being offered so far is by use of an expensive clotting agent designed for traumatic injuries.

Do you agree with that theory? Or do you have another one to offer?

Again - perhaps the EMT didn't think it was bad enough that it needed something to keep the lacerations closed. The bleeding had stopped due to compression or ice. Or some other treatment, IDK. The EMT then covered the wound with an antibiotic or similar. Perhaps the EMT didn't want to bandage to stick in GZ hair, or it wouldn't stick because of the rain, or whatever. Perhaps he had a bandage on and it fell off in the police car for all I know.

The next day GZ saw someone else who disagreed with that treatment, and stuck a bandage on it.

I don't understand why that is so far fetched. It seems perfectly plausible to me.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Well folks, I decided to take the 90 minute online course and I'm excited to announce that I am now an official fellow of the American College of Forensic Examiners Institute. Please let me now if you have any questions. I've just performed an analysis of the screams and I'm about to analyze George Zimmerman's head in the video.

 

[johnny karate]

Knock yourself out trying to prove the SFD doesn't use Celox/quikclot if you want.

Oh, don't worry about it. I spend absolutely no time trying to disprove the claims of other people that they have failed to prove in the first place.

Do you have some "vast medical knowledge" yourself?

No, but I'm not the one making specific claims about how the EMTs might have treated Zimmerman.

Hair. Even very short hair like Zimmerman had on 2/26 can prevent a bandage from sticking properly. You have to use head wrap or shave some hair to properly bandage a wound within the hairline, for Zimmerman just shaving his head would have been a natural look for him so could have easily done that.

Was that the same hair Zimmerman had the next day when it was reported he had bandages on his head? Or do you imagine he had some different, stickier hair by then?

Also, if the EMTs couldn't get the bandages to stick to Zimmerman's head without use of a head wrap, why do you suppose they didn't just apply a head wrap?

I didn't say this wound was a "strong bleeder", just that head wounds in general can have that feature which combined with the difficulty of sticking a bandage to a hair covered area makes me think celox is something that would be ideal for head lacerations.

And the fact that you think that has what significance?

I cited an exact product with recommend use...

The instructions on my shampoo bottle say "Rinse and repeat". So according to your logic, the appropriate way to wash my hair is to never stop washing my hair because that is the recommended use.

...and then cited a news story of a police department in a nearby town using the same product three years ago. Not sure what else you want here.

How about evidence that Celox is commonly used by EMTs for treatment of wounds similar to those claimed by Zimmerman?

One only need read the headline of your cite to see a major discrepancy:

Local police use blood–clotting agent to save lives

I'm fairly certain Zimmerman's injuries weren't life-threatening.

Perhaps if the headline had read "Local police use blood-clotting agent because they just couldn't get the darn bandage to stick" you might have had a point.

Also, the text of the article further diminishes your case:

"It is not meant for the little scrapes and boo-boos," he said. "It is a resort of last means that clots arterial bleeding when nothing else is working."

Oops.

Perhaps the SWAT team medic being quoted never encountered hair quite as resistant to adhesive as George Zimmerman's.

I'm not trying to prove his claim is true. I am just showing that it is plausible/possible.

Do you honestly think the use of Celox is more plausible/possible than Zimmerman exaggerating the severity of his injuries?

 

[johnny karate]

Again - perhaps the EMT didn't think it was bad enough that it needed something to keep the lacerations closed. The bleeding had stopped due to compression or ice. Or some other treatment, IDK. The EMT then covered the wound with an antibiotic or similar. Perhaps the EMT didn't want to bandage to stick in GZ hair, or it wouldn't stick because of the rain, or whatever. Perhaps he had a bandage on and it fell off in the police car for all I know.

The next day GZ saw someone else who disagreed with that treatment, and stuck a bandage on it.

I don't understand why that is so far fetched. It seems perfectly plausible to me.

So maybe a medical professional decided to leave Zimmerman with an uncovered open head wound for some reason, or maybe the bandage fell off.

You honestly find these explanations more or equally plausible than a guy facing murder charges exaggerating the severity of his injuries to bolster his claim of self-defense?

ETA: Also, it should be noted that Zimmerman was reported to have two butterfly bandages on his head the next day, so if we're going with the "maybe the bandage fell off" theory, it's actually two bandages that would have fallen off. Maybe it was a bad batch. Or maybe it only was one bandage and the other wound was left open and uncovered for whatever reason. That way, we'd have a combination of inscrutable medical practice and conveniently defective bandages. I just want to make sure we're covering all the bases.

 

[Dancing David]

Well folks, I decided to take the 90 minute online course and I'm excited to announce that I am now an official fellow of the American College of Forensic Examiners Institute. Please let me now if you have any questions. I've just performed an analysis of the screams and I'm about to analyze George Zimmerman's head in the video.

Can you preform marriages too?

 

[curi0us]

So are you of the opinion that none of the tapes were really Bin Laden, or that all of the identifications were un-scientific? Why does the CIA believe them to be worthwhile?

I'm just of the opinion that Owen has been using psuedoscience in his voice ID declarations. His determinations might actually arrive at the right conclusion but the way he gets there is bogus.

I don't think the CIA has ever explained their methods but they would also factor in regular intelligence and political reasons before making any public determinations. (That may be similar to what Owen does, secondary factors outside of the audio may be what drives his certainty.)

On this note, I've brought up the software "Sound Hound". How does Sound Hound match your voice to the melody of a song, even if there is room noise or you sing off pitch?

I dunno about sound hound. I would guess it is a combination of speech recognition and melody recognition. If s person sings the exact right lyrics a song lyric text search might be all that's needed. For melody recognition a sequence of musical notes with pitch relationships to each other could be used. If the first note of a melody is not right but a person has the right sequence of up and down pitch shifts they could theoretically be horribly out of tune but still portray a pattern that software could match to a song.

I'd be really interested to know how the software learns songs in the first place myself. I will look into Sound Hound to try to learn more. Hopefully my guesses above about how it works are not wildly off the mark.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

No, but I'm not the one making specific claims about how the EMTs might have treated Zimmerman.

So maybe a medical professional decided to leave Zimmerman with an uncovered open head wound

Who said uncovered ? I said it was covered with antibiotic.

It sounds like you are claiming that a head wound has to be covered by a bandage to make it past a certain number on the johnnykarate severity-o-meter.

, or maybe the bandage fell off.

You honestly find these explanations more or equally plausible than a guy facing murder charges exaggerating the severity of his injuries to bolster his claim of self-defense? And it doesn't make you doubt Zimmerman's story even a little bit?

Again - the only measure of severity was an attorney claiming a doctor claimed it 'should have had stitches'. That an EMT and someone in a hospital might disagree is not unbelievable.

Honestly, no, this particular topic does not make me doubt zimmermans story.

 

[johnny karate]

Who said uncovered ? I said it was covered with antibiotic.

It sounds like you are claiming that a head wound has to be covered by a bandage to make it past a certain number on the johnnykarate severity-o-meter.

No, what it sounds like is that you think an antibiotic salve could keep a wound closed shortly after it was inflicted, but for some unknown reason that same wound needs a butterfly bandage to stay closed the following day.

It also sounds like you think the EMTs who treated Zimmerman were negligent in their duties. There is no proof of this mind you. It's just all in the service of denying the likely possibility that Zimmerman lied about his injuries.

Again - the only measure of severity was an attorney claiming a doctor claimed it 'should have had stitches'. That an EMT and someone in a hospital might disagree is not unbelievable.

An EMT and a doctor might very well disagree. It doesn't make it any less a lie. And that's my point. What we were told about Zimmerman's injuries contradicts the facts.

And again, you're overlooking the need of bandages the following day as a measure of severity. He was wearing butterfly bandages which have the express purpose of holding a wound closed that wouldn't otherwise stay closed on its own. For some reason, he didn't need those the night before.

Honestly, no, this particular topic does not make me doubt zimmermans story.

Fine. But you didn't answer my first question.

Do you honestly find these explanations more or equally plausible than a guy facing murder charges exaggerating the severity of his injuries to bolster his claim of self-defense?

 

[Unabogie]

I trust GZ brother and father as little as TM parents. None of them were there.

I'm not trying to move any goalposts. It's plausible that they were half on, half off the grass. Or Started on the sidewalk and rolled to the grass.

This is GZ claim:
With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked him, then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law-enforcement authorities told the Orlando Sentinel.

ETA: I don't know where you got the claim you made above:
Zimmerman claims he was being pummeled against it when he shot.
If it's from the father, meh. See what I wrote about the all the parents.

It's in the video. And yes, it's Zimmerman's father. That's the most reliable source for what Zimmerman's story was to police. Hopefully, he didn't tell the police one story or his father another or else that's just one more piece of evidence he's lying. He explicitly claims that Zimmerman's head was being bashed against the cement. Not once, but over and over. He then tried to push Martin off of him "onto the grass", but Martin saw the gun, told him "you're going to die tonight", continued beating him (in the same spot) and that's when Zimmerman shot him.

The fact that a witness puts them away from the sidewalk contradicts his story. You said witnesses backed him up, but I've just shown you that's false. Some might, but at least one does not.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Do you honestly find these explanations more or equally plausible than a guy facing murder charges exaggerating the severity of his injuries to bolster his claim of self-defense?

Yes.

As was pointed out earlier:

He was treated by EMS who no doubt made notes of his injuries, taken to the police station, observed by police officers, and likely photographed there. And then he went home and beat himself up to support his story that he had injuries. Makes sense to me.

I don't think he ran to the ER to get additional proof of his injuries after having been treated and documented by EMTS and likely the police. I don't find that plausible.

Why do you think the EMTs were going to take him to the hospital ? For his non-existent injuries ?

 

[Unabogie]

I'm just of the opinion that Owen has been using psuedoscience in his voice ID declarations. His determinations might actually arrive at the right conclusion but the way he gets there is bogus.

I don't think the CIA has ever explained their methods but they would also factor in regular intelligence and political reasons before making any public determinations. (That may be similar to what Owen does, secondary factors outside of the audio may be what drives his certainty.)


I dunno about sound hound. I would guess it is a combination of speech recognition and melody recognition. If s person sings the exact right lyrics a song lyric text search might be all that's needed. For melody recognition a sequence of musical notes with pitch relationships to each other could be used. If the first note of a melody is not right but a person has the right sequence of up and down pitch shifts they could theoretically be horribly out of tune but still portray a pattern that software could match to a song.

I'd be really interested to know how the software learns songs in the first place myself. I will look into Sound Hound to try to learn more. Hopefully my guesses above about how it works are not wildly off the mark.

I'm trying to elicit some sort of admission that there are experts who can identify voices on tape. If the DA uses someone other than Owen, is that enough? What if they bring in the FBI (federal FBI or "Florida" FBI)?

Obviously, the ability to analyze sound waves using computers is something we see all the time. We can download free apps. The software I program in, Flash, has a built in API to read wave data, and that's just kid's stuff compared to professional software designed for the task. There are companies like Visa who were apparently getting into this a decade ago:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/106142/visa_gets_behind_voice_recognition.html

Visa International is partnering with a maker of voice recognition software to develop voice authentication technology for use with Visa-brand credit cards. The two companies will be looking at applications of the biometric security in the areas of e-commerce, mobile commerce, and risk management, according to a statement released Friday by Vocent Solutions.


"Voice recognition is one of the ways that we're getting to the vision of universal commerce--which we refer to as u-commerce--being able to conduct commerce anytime, anyway, anywhere you want," said Georgann Scally, vice president of strategic alliances at Visa International.
"To do that, you have to deploy every technology available. We think voice authentication and recognition are technologies that show a lot of promise. They're simple, easy, non-invasive, and very accurate," Scally said.

That was ten years ago. I think people are just whistling past the graveyard on this. If that scream wasn't Zimmerman, it will be proven in court. The DA specifically mentioned that in her affidavit, so I think they asked that question early on and got some experts to weigh in.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Can you preform marriages too?

No, but if you've discovered someone in a porn movie that looks just like your fiance but with a wig, get her to make a 911 call, record it, and I'll compare it to her screams of passion from the porn movie and tell you if it's her.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It's in the video. And yes, it's Zimmerman's father. That's the most reliable source for what Zimmerman's story was to police.

No, the police would be the most reliable source for what he told the police.

Hopefully, he didn't tell the police one story or his father another or else that's just one more piece of evidence he's lying.

Or his father misunderstood or mis-remembered. Or was exaggerating to protect his son. I believe it's called hearsay ?

He explicitly claims that Zimmerman's head was being bashed against the cement. Not once, but over and over. He then tried to push Martin off of him "onto the grass", but Martin saw the gun, told him "you're going to die tonight", continued beating him (in the same spot) and that's when Zimmerman shot him.

Again, hearsay. I imagine it's probably close to the truth though.

The fact that a witness puts them away from the sidewalk contradicts his story. You said witnesses backed him up, but I've just shown you that's false. Some might, but at least one does not.

Well, did the witness say where they were in the grass ? How do you know it was 'away' from the sidewalk - or does that also include 'right next to' the sidewalk - or possible half-on half-off the sidewalk ?

 

[Freddy]

That is incorrect. Not only is the video inconsistent with the claim that Zimmerman needed stitches, but the witness claims from the next day are inconsistent with the video.



That's great. But we're talking about Zimmerman's scalp laceration, not his broken nose.



And the fact that it seemed to require a bandage the following day.



No, I'm basing it on common sense that tells me a wound that requires a butterfly bandage to stay closed the following day wouldn't magically stay closed on its own an hour after being inflicted.

So far, the only explanation being offered is that the EMTs might have used a more expensive quick clotting compound developed for traumatic wounds we don't even know they have to treat Zimmerman's relatively minor scalp laceration.

This, somehow, is granted more plausibility than the idea that Zimmerman might have simply exaggerated his injuries.



Believe what you want, but the evidence is contradictory.

You certainly have a point, but note that the legal standard for self-defense is not entirely dependent on the severity of the injuries actually suffered. If Zimmerman reasonably believed that he would suffer severe bodily injury or death if he did not resort deadly force, then he has a legally sufficient self-defense claim. If, when he fired the shot, he reasonably believed that he was defenseless and had no means of escape, then he was not required to assume that the beating would stop short of "death or serious bodily injury," even if he had not already suffered serious injury at that point.

The issue is whether he reasonably feared death or serious bodily injury, not whether he actually suffered serious bodily injury. Obviously, if his injuries were in fact severe, that would pretty much prove that his fear of serious injury was reasonable. But just because his injuries were not severe, that doesn't establish that he was unreasonable in fearing that he would suffer serious injury or death if he did not use deadly force. Many people who kill in perfectly legitimate self-defense do not suffer any actual injury.

That said, any evidence that he is being less than honest would certainly tend to discredit his entire account. So if it can be shown that he deliberately exaggerated the extent of his injuries, that would tend to cast doubt on his credibility in general. But in that case, what would matter would not be the fact that his injuries were not severe, but rather the fact that in exaggerating his injuries he would have exhibited dishonesty.

 

[Unabogie]

No, the police would be the most reliable source for what he told the police.

Come on, Mr. Pedantic. We don't know what the police story is. I obviously meant most reliable public version, since his father volunteered to go on TV and tell "his side".

Or his father misunderstood or mis-remembered. Or was exaggerating to protect his son. I believe it's called hearsay ?

Ok, so this applies to all witnesses. Somehow, the witnesses who help Zimmerman can't have "mis-remembered", but his father is half out of his mind and should be ignored?

Again, hearsay. I imagine it's probably close to the truth though.

Ok, fine. If it is the truth, and he did claim to have had his head bashed against cement, this witness contradicts him, unless you want to go to extraordinary lengths to parse every tiny thing in Zimmerman's favor...

Well, did the witness say where they were in the grass ? How do you know it was 'away' from the sidewalk - or does that also include 'right next to' the sidewalk - or possible half-on half-off the sidewalk ?

Oh, right. I guess you do.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I'm trying to elicit some sort of admission that there are experts who can identify voices on tape.

And that has what to do precisely with someone who claims to be able to identify that a male voice speaking on a 911 call is different than the male voice heard screaming in distress in the background, from outside through walls, on a 911 call?

Or do you see those two as the same??

 

[Unabogie]

And that has what to do precisely with someone who claims to be able to identify that a male voice speaking on a 911 call is different than the male voice heard screaming in distress in the background, from outside through walls, on a 911 call?

Or do you see those two as the same??

Yes, I'd venture to say that people who have become experts in this field know how to compare two recordings accurately, even though they are different recording devices saying different things or doing things like singing or screaming.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Come on, Mr. Pedantic. We don't know what the police story is. I obviously meant most reliable public version, since his father volunteered to go on TV and tell "his side".

What I quoted earlier was what the police leaked to the Orlando Sentinel. I trust that more than what either parties parents said.

Ok, so this applies to all witnesses. Somehow, the witnesses who help Zimmerman can't have "mis-remembered", but his father is half out of his mind and should be ignored?

His father was not a witness, and is not even pretending to be impartial or disinterested.

ETA: the witness statements I have referenced were either 911 calls or what we have "john" telling FOX on camera the next day. Possible to mis-remember, sure. Did the witness on AC give the police a statement that night or the next day ?

Ok, fine. If it is the truth, and he did claim to have had his head bashed against cement, this witness contradicts him, unless you want to go to extraordinary lengths to parse every tiny thing in Zimmerman's favor...
Oh, right. I guess you do.

You haven't provided any evidence they weren't ever on the sidewalk. You tell me - how did he get the lacerations the police report noted on the back of his head if not from the sidewalk ?

I'm not going out of my way to be ridiculous - People walk on the sidewalk. It makes sense the encounter started there, yes ? Did the witness say where in the grass they were ? Yes or no ?