It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Photo of George Zimmerman's Wounds Taken After Altercation

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   
looks like some actual evidence is coming out. and more evidence to sway me over to Zimmerman's side.


A new photograph obtained exclusively by ABC News showing the bloodied back of George Zimmerman's head, which was taken three minutes after he shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, gives possible credence to his claim that Martin had bashed his head against the concrete as he fought for his life.


Zimmerman Photo

ETA: i searched this already and did not find anything. however if there is another thread please close.
edit on 20-4-2012 by Hardstepah because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
I already posted this photo in the LA Riot thread.

Here
edit on 20-4-2012 by DarthMuerte because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
We the Jury find the defendant not guilty, Your Honor. Looks pretty serious to me. Backs up Zimmerman's story nicely. I know some will not like it, but the guy had a right to defend himself against an attack producing injuries like that. Bloody skull? Yeah go ahead and shoot.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
i'm curious as to what the zimmerman hunters think about this.

i have been fairly neutral on this as i have been waiting for evidence to surface and so far this is just another piece to show zimmerman had a struggle.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Urantia1111
We the Jury find the defendant not guilty, Your Honor. Looks pretty serious to me. Backs up Zimmerman's story nicely. I know some will not like it, but the guy had a right to defend himself against an attack producing injuries like that. Bloody skull? Yeah go ahead and shoot.


So Zimmerman has a right to use deadly force to protect himself from someone, but Martin doesnt have the right to confront and defend himself from a person stalking and confronting him near his own backyard, while not breaking any laws?

You see the obvious double standard, right?




edit on 20-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
I gotta be honest here-I see blood on his head. I see no wound. Without a good view of the would, there is no way to tell if that is Zimm's blood(unless, of course, they took samples of it at the scene).



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


trayvon did have a right. however trayvon did not have the right to knock him down and start slamming his head into the pavement. this argument is tired and has too many holes. if somebody is following you, you have every right to say "hey you need something?" but you do not have the right to assault somebody. i thought the law was clear on that type of thing. whoever swings first is the aggressor and the one who is in violation of the law.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Come on! Those photos have got to be faked!
Probably done like those championship wrestlers make their blood show.


Sorry for the sarcasm


I have said all along that this should NOT have been tried in the media or the public arena.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Urantia1111
We the Jury find the defendant not guilty, Your Honor. Looks pretty serious to me. Backs up Zimmerman's story nicely. I know some will not like it, but the guy had a right to defend himself against an attack producing injuries like that. Bloody skull? Yeah go ahead and shoot.


So Zimmerman has a right to use deadly force to protect himself from someone, but Martin doesnt have the right to confront and defend himself from a person stalking and confronting him near his own backyard, while not breaking any laws?

You see the obvious double standard, right?
He was not "near his own backyard". He was on the way to his father's house, but he did not live in that neighborhood.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
In an effort to contain the numbers of threads about this case, please post your thoughts in these ongoing threads:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks




**Thread Closed**


for future reference:

We Have A New Search Engine--Please Use It!



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join