HLN reenactment falsely portrays shooting

June 4, 2013

June 4, 2013

Good afternnoon:

Vinnie Politano and his “expert” death investigator, Joseph Scott Morgan, stumbled badly out of the HLN starting gate with a false reenactment of the shooting that is inexcusable hall-of-shame material. Here’s the video of the reenactment:

Come on, son.

Reenactments are supposed to exactly reproduce the event being reenacted. They are misleading and worthless, if they do not.

This reenactment did not come close to reproducing the defendant’s description of the shooting because he told the police that, after Trayvon sucker-punched him in the nose to prevent him from calling the police and he fell down on his back, Trayvon mounted him in a seated position straddling his body and began raining down blows to his nose and face MMA style before switching to grab the sides of the defendant’s head and repeatedly slam the back of the defendant’s head against the concrete sidewalk. Then, as the defendant began crying out for help, Trayvon attempted to silence and smother the defendant by placing one hand over the defendant’s mouth and the other over the nose. That is when the defendant claims that he felt Trayvon’s hand on his chest sliding toward the gun that the defendant had concealed from view in a holster inside his pants against the back of his right hip. The defendant said he pinned Trayvon’s hand against his chest with the upper part of his right arm and then grabbed the gun with his right hand and fired the fatal shot taking care not to shoot his left hand.

According to the defendant, Trayvon was never standing over him leaning forward in the position taken by Politano. Indeed none of the hitting, slamming and smothering events described by the defendant would have been possible, if Trayvon were in a standing position.

So much for the defendant’s claim that he reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of death or serious injury such that he had to use deadly force to survive the encounter. Call me psychic, but somehow I do not think that is what Politano intended to demonstrate.

According to the defendant, they were in this position with Trayvon on top.

Here’s LLMPapa’s video:

Of course, it would not have been possible for Trayvon to have seen much less reached the gun from this position.

Therefore, we know the defendant was lying.

Since he and his expert ignored the defendant’s statement, what were they attempting to demonstrate?

I believe they were attempting to account for a straight-on shot front to back where the muzzle of the gun was in contact with the hoodie and shirt underneath it, but the fabric was 2 to 12 inches from the entry wound.

May I have a drum roll, please. Time to pull out ye olde trusty sledgehammer and pound a square peg into a round hole.

Yup, Trayvon must have been leaning forward and the fabric was hanging straight down.

Nice try, but no cigar.

The crime lab analyst who examined the sweatshirt and shirt beneath it found that the cloth was stretched at the time the fatal shot was fired and we have independently verified that the holes in the fabric do not align with the entry wound. They are displaced from the vertical in a diagonal direction toward Trayvon’s right hip.

Mere gravity does not account for this displacement.

I will tell you what does, however. The defendant had a grip on the sweatshirt and shirt with his left hand restraining Trayvon from getting away as he took careful aim and fired.

Not coincidentally, this also explains why the defendant said he “aimed” before he squeezed off the fatal shot in order to avoid shooting his left hand.

Politano’s clueless expert reenacted the shooting by holding his fake red gun with both hands, which is contrary to the defendant’s narrative.

Finally, we know the defendant was on top because W18 witnessed the shooting and said he was on top.

Clean heels with wet grass and mud on the toes of the defendant’s boots are not consistent with the defendant’s claim that he shimmied in an atttempt to get out from under Trayvon.

The back of the defendant’s jacket was wet because it was raining, not because he was lying on his back in the grass. A photograph of the back of his jacket taken at the police station did not show any mud or grass present.

Two conclusions can be reached from the evidence. The defendant lied and he was not in imminent danger of death or serious injury when he fired the fatal shot. In fact, he was in control of Trayvon when he killed him.

That is not self-defense.

It is second degree murder.

(H/T to LLMPapa for the video and Ay2Z for the inspiration to write this post)


Featuring: Part III of LLMPapa’s Cardboard and Bullshit

March 3, 2013

LLMPapa follows his gripping Part II yesterday with Part III of Cardboard and Bullshit regarding the kill shot.

Cain’t hardly wait for Part IV.


Defendant Was Straddling Trayvon When He Fired the Kill Shot

February 9, 2013

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Nefertari05 posted the following comment today at 2:54 pm.

“I am curious about one thing though. Many people have posted it is physically impossible to make that shot, with the straight trajectory, while laying on his back with Trayvon over him. I posted this thought many months ago, using a sexual position analogy, but I really don’t understand why if Zimmerman’s arm is raised at a 45 degree angle (aiming up, continuing the 45 degree angle), and Trayvon is leaning over, perpendicular to the gun, why it wouldn’t be a straight thru, no angle shot. Granted, I am no scientist, and my understanding of physics is elementary, at best, but a 45 degree angled arm (from a prone position), with Trayvon leaning over, perpendicular, seems like a straight shot to me. I know I’m missing something. I freely admit it. Can you explain to me what it is, so I have a better understanding?”

When medical examiners do autopsies on gunshot victims, they insert metal rods into the wounds and take photographs of the rods sticking out from the body so people can clearly see the angle of entry and trajectory of each bullet.

I have no doubt the assistant ME did the same thing with Trayvon’s bullet wound.

Couple that with expert testimony about the distance from which the fatal shot was fired and you get a pretty good idea of the location of the muzzle and the position of the gun relative to the location and position of Trayvon’s body.

Hold that image in your mind and imagine that you are the shooter lying on your back with the gun in a holster inside your waistband behind your right hip.

How do you get that gun out of the holster using only your right hand and maneuver it into the position it has to be in when the defendant fired the fatal shot?

Remember that he said he extended his arm, aimed to avoid shooting his left hand and fired.

The first problem is that his body is on top of the gun. He would have to roll over on his left hip to be able to reach the gun with his right hand and pull it out. This move probably would have thrown Trayvon off his body, but he never claimed that happened and, if it had, he would no longer have been reasonably in fear of imminent death or serious injury.

The second problem is that the presence of Trayvon’s thigh and lower leg would have complicated rolling to the left and blocked access to the gun. Also, the surface of the ground would have blocked and restricted movement of the elbow further complicating the draw (not to mention that there is no way Trayvvon could have seen the gun).

Third, I’m not sure, but I think he holstered the gun for a cross-draw with the left hand. If so, the gun butt would have been facing forward requiring an additional move to turn the gun around so that the muzzle was facing forward.

Fourth, then he had to position the gun between their bodies instead of just sticking it into Trayvon’s ribs and pulling the trigger.

All of these problems are avoided if he is on top straddling Trayvon with his knees and shins pinning Trayvon’s arms to the ground.

He could take his time, draw his gun, taunt Trayvon, aim and pull the trigger.

Mary Cutcher, Selma Mora and the teacher all said the shooter stood up immediately after the shot leaving the victim lying on the ground.

Finally, there is the displacement between the bullet holes in the two sweatshirts that align with each other, but not the wound that I have previously mentioned. The displacement indicates the defendant was gripping the sweatshirts with his left hand and pulling the sweatshirts down and to the left and away from Trayvon’s body toward himself, possibly to get his hand out of the line of fire, when he fired the kill shot.

If you like this blog, please consider making a donation via Paypal using the yellow “Donate” button in the upper right portion of the page to the right of the title of the article and just below the search box.

Thank you.


Why Did John (W6) Lie to the Police?

February 3, 2013

Sunday, February 3, 2013

As I’ve said before, I find it very difficult to attribute to a coincidence John’s (W6) first statement to police falsely describing an MMA-style thrashing that exactly matches the defendant’s false statement.

The statistical probability that those two false statements would coincidentally match must be vanishingly small. Therefore, I believe BDLR and the FDLE concluded early on that John repeated what the defendant told him.

I imagine that they wondered if John actually saw and/or heard what happened and knew the defendant was lying, or if he merely repeated what the defendant told him in an innocent but misguided effort to help him.

Let there be no mistake, however. Telling the police that he saw something he did not see is a lie, even if he believed that the detailed description he provided were true.

His conduct is more reprehensible, of course, if he knew the defendant lied about what happened and he repeated that lie to the police.

Let us assume for a moment that he repeated the lie knowing that it was a lie. Why might he have done that?

I offer six possible reasons.

First, the defendant may have been his friend and he lied to protect him.

Second, he may have feared him and agreed to tell the police whatever the defendant told him to say in order to protect himself and his wife from retaliation.

Third, the defendant may have threatened to harm him or his wife if John did not tell the police what the defendant instructed him to say.

Fourth, if he were a home owner, he would have had a financial interest in the outcome of the investigation. Since a conviction might result in HOA liability for wrongful death, he may have lied to protect his financial self-interest.

Fifth, he may have known that the defendant was going to follow, confront and interrogate Trayvon about neighborhood burglaries before the incident happened.

Sixth, and the most ominous reason, he may have known that the defendant was going to follow, confront, interrogate and kill Trayvon before the incident happened.

I have long suspected that the defendant had enlisted the support and cooperation of some neighborhood residents to serve as his eyes and ears. I also suspect that those eyes and ears had reported Trayvon’s presence in the neighborhood to the defendant. In other words, I believe he was specifically hunting for Trayvon when he left his house that night and I believe John was one of his informants.

LLMPapa’s video last night about Trayvon’s hoodie is consistent with this theory. He pointed out that the defendant accurately described the hoodie in the NEN call as dark gray and the defendant as a teenager; yet, the defendant would not have known either fact since it was dark and raining. The wet hoodie appeared to be black or dark blue and Trayvon had it up concealing most of his head and face.

Therefore, either the defendant had seen Trayvon in daylight wearing the hoodie or someone provided him with a description before he went hunting.

I do not doubt that BDLR and the FDLE have known this for a long time and they probably knew it when they interviewed John (W6) and he retracted his statement.

John (W6) needs to come clean and tell the whole truth.

Unfortunately, however, his credibility is no better than the defendant’s. Why would anyone believe anything he says unless it is independently corroborated?

The plot would thicken if independent corroboration in the form of the defendant’s cell phone records show a call from John moments before the defendant grabbed Shellie’s gun and went hunting for Trayvon followed by a call from the defendant to John moments after the shooting.


Featuring LLMPapa Video: I’ll Take the Hoodie for $1,000 Alex

February 2, 2013

Papa posted a video about Trayvon’s hoodie early this afternoon. I just saw it and immediately decided to feature it.

As usual, he makes a great point.

Take a look.


%d bloggers like this: