Skip to main content

View Diary: Rachel Jeantel "I believe Trayvon hit first" (61 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  it doesn't entitle Martin to beat the shit (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Victor Ward, brooklyn137, coffeetalk

    out of Z.  if her guesses were right, then Z is not guilty.  

    •  'Beat the shit'? (7+ / 0-)

      Please.  I've sustained more damage than Zimmerman displayed falling down all by myself with no other human involved.  The scalp is highly vascular, head wounds bleed far more than than people expect.

      Zimmerman showed no actually signs of having 'the shit beat out of him'.  He showed signs of maybe having been hit once, and scraped his head on the sidewalk.  

      If you think he 'had the shit beat out of him', then you've never seen anyone who actually 'had the shit beat out of them'.

      •  Not according to Dr. DiMaio (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pi Li, Victor Ward, VClib

        Whose credentials are pretty stellar and who testified that the injuries showed significant force (he said any blow significant enough to tear the scalp means significant force was used), and that if the beating had continued, there could have been a risk of death or serious bodily injury.  

        It's not like it undisputed that his injuries were nothing. Even the prosecution's ME said that the injuries were consistent with 3 or 4 blows on concrete. Sure, it's not the 20 or so Z said (although Dr. DiMaio thought  it was more than 3 or 4).  But even or 4 blows to the head on concrete is not nothing.

        •  'Consistent with' is not the same as (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          shanikka, Tonedevil

          'happened'.  It merely means he could have taken that many, and still only gotten the very minor damage inflicted.

          I also guess 'significant' has some specific legal meaning, since you keep using it, but I'm not aware of actual scientific definition thereof.  You can lacerate the scalp with extremely minor force - simply falling down onto concrete can indeed do it.  Was Zimmerman's scalp actually 'torn'?  Did he require stitches?  I admit I didn't see the part of the trial where they admitted medical evidence, but the posted photographs and emergency personnel reports didn't seem to indicate anything beyond minor lacerations.  Was more evidence of 'significant' damage presented at trial?

        •  You Know (2+ / 0-)

          Generally, you don't hire an expert whose credentials aren't stellar.  You hire one that is not only great on paper, but fully willing to testify to YOUR version of things and minimize the other side. There is no such thing as an objective, hired, expert.

          You claim to be a lawyer.  Assuming you are, and I have no reason to doubt it, you know that.  So why are you now claiming that somehow DiMaio's testimony is anything more than what it was: paid for by the Zimmerman defense to minimize the obviousness of the bullshit lies that Zimmerman told about how badly he was being beat up that night despite the physical evidence which says to anyone who actually knows anything about being in a fight or having been injured in one that Zimmerman was just making shit up?

          •  shanikka - I agree you hire experts who agree (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dr Swig Mcjigger

            with the side of the case you are advocating. However, experts do have their reputation at stake which they are unlikely to damage for any one case particularly if they are people of the stature of Vincent Di Maio, MD who is the preeminent consulting pathologist in the US on the topic of gun shot wounds. In addition to being the long time editor in chief of the Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology Dr. Di Maio authored the bibles in this area including seminal texts on pathology and gun shot wounds. You can find those here:


            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 11:58:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  An Expert's Reputation (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              How many experts have you worked with? I have worked with a lot and I have to tell you, you have no idea what you're talking about as it relates to what they worry about, or don't worry about, when it comes to their "reputation."

              •  It depends on the expert. (0+ / 0-)

                Dammit Jim, I'm a lawyer, not a grammarian. So sue me.

                by Pi Li on Thu Jul 18, 2013 at 04:50:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No It Doesn't (0+ / 0-)

                  Not when the issue is one in which two experts can reasonably differ. Reputation isn't an issue: who is paying you is the only issue, or nobody would ever hear of you being designated an expert.  And, since you are a lawyer, you know that as well, begging the question of why you would want folks here at Daily Kos to think differently.)

    •  This is Where (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      We agree to disagree.  If someone puts their hands on me without justification, I'm going to do my level best to make sure they won't do it again. I've taught my children to do the same.  That is just how we roll, and white people don't have to like it (hell, I know a lot of white people who have taught their children the same thing. It's called self-preservation.)

      Just because you Zimmerman excuse makers (excuse me, racial excuse makers since you show up in damned near every thread involving race here at Daily Kos singing the same song of "oh, but.......") think that somehow Travyon Martin had some obligation to acquiesce to a private citizen with the audacity and the nerve to get into Trayvon Martin's perfectly lawful business doesn't mean you're morally (or, outside of the state of Florida, legally) right.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site