The dispatcher asked Zimmerman, who’d called 911 at least four times previously for other incidents, if he was following the person. He replies, “Yes.”
“OK. We don’t need you to do that,” the dispatcher responded.
Authorities release seven 911 calls from the night of the shooting. In one of the 911 recordings, Zimmerman, against the advice of the 911 dispatcher, follows Martin. In one of the recordings, a voice screams “Help, help!” in the background, followed by the sound of a gunshot.
And on one 911 call, placed by a neighbor, a police sergeant counted one man yelling “help!” or “help me!” 14 times in a span of 38 seconds.
Again:
(1): Dr. Di Maio's opinion is that the shot was fired within 2-4 inches. Compare that with Dr. Bao's opinion of 0.4 inches to 4 feet. If that's not "close" enough for you, I am not sure what is.
(2): You mentioned the location of the confrontation, and where Mr. Martin's body was found -- both of which corroborated Mr. Zimmerman's account, rather than Mr. Martin's lady friend's. Both in fact suggest that Mr. Martin approached Mr. Zimmerman, rather than the other way around.
(3): the truth, in my opinion, is already out there. It is gathered from forensic evidence, eyewitness accounts, audio recordings, and testimony of lay and expert witnesses alike. If you look at the evidence objectively, I think you will see it.
Unfortunately, it does not appear from the above that you knew or considered all of the evidence. Again, if you are willing to listen, I am happy to explain.
As indicated previously, I am concerned of your interpretation of the evidence. And now I can tell that you have been consistently misled by the “evidence.”
Your use of the term “intermediate range shooting” is unfortunately not how I perceive or use it. Regardless, I would like to remind you that there was indeed eyewitness account -- Mr. John Good – who testified that Mr. Martin was on top of Mr. Zimmerman, in a “pound and ground” manner. There are other pieces of evidence that shows that Mr. Martin was on top of Mr. Zimmerman when he was shot.
You have chosen to take only one side of the story and continued to ignore all else. Just like how you’ve decided to only extract a fraction of Dr. Bao’s testimony, and ignored everything that points to the other direction. If that’s what you want to do, there is no point in showing the evidence to you. You have to be willing to see and listen, even if it means that you were wrong. That is how the truth is revealed.
Such as the “iced tea” example. That was the myth that continued to show the failure of media, even to this day, to get some basic facts right. It was not iced tea. It was AriZona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail. Please see this: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2013/07/22/press-perpetuates-iced-tea-myth-coverage-zimmerman-verdict-and-trayvon-m
If you are interested in knowing why that is significant, I’d be happy to share (provided, however, that you are willing to set aside bias and prejudice, and see the facts objectively).
“If you are interested in hearing the whole truth and not just the story that you want to believe, I can share some more. One example: Mr. Martin did not carry ice tea with him that night. Please at least get that right.”
One officer who lifted Martin's shirt at the scene "felt a large, cold can in the center pocket" of the teen's hoodie, which was the iced tea he'd bought just minutes before. Blood was later spotted on his Skittles, along with a lighter, a T-Mobile brand cell phone, headphones and $40 and some change.
I did see that. Dr. Bao testified that the distance was between 0.4 inches to 4 feet. Dr. Di Maio, a forensic pathologist, testified that the distance is in the range of 2-4 inches. (By the way, Dr. Bao admitted that he relied on Dr. Di Maio's textbook in forming his opinions).
But be it 4 feet or 4 inches, neither is what I'd consider "中距离射击." Instead, it is more consistent with Mr. Zimmerman's account of events.
I am troubled that you inserted so much emotion and guesswork in the above. In a court, speculation is not permitted. Your must come to a decision through evidence.
I am also troubled that you decided to apply only the "evidence" that you want to believe in, and not the evidence that showed both sides of the story, as the jury did.
If you are interested in hearing the whole truth and not just the story that you want to believe, I can share some more. One example: Mr. Martin did not carry ice tea with him that night. Please at least get that right.
