Analysis of lab report in Zimmerman's case - part 2

Now, let’s take a look at the DNA and blood analyses.

Zimmerman’s weapon, handgun:

1. Grip, handgun: Positive chemical indication for blood.

2. Swab from grip: showed mixed DNA profile belonging to at least 2 individuals. One matched to Zimmerman. Trayvon Martin is excluded as a possible contributor to the mixed DNA.

3. Swab from slide and holster: negative indication for blood.

4. Limited DNA results from slide insufficient for inclusion purpose but consistent with presence of at least one male individual. No determination can be made regarding possibility of Zimmerman or Trayvon contribution.

5. Holster: Mixed DNA profile obtained from holster swab. Demonstrated presence of at least 3 individuals. One matches Zimmerman. No determination can be made regarding the possibility of Trayvon contribution.

6. Swab from trigger: result not interpretable.

Trayvon Martin:

1. Fingernail scrapings from Trayvon:

Right hand: positive for presence of blood. No DNA results foreign to Trayvon Benjamin Martin found.

Left hand: STR DNA analysis performed. No DNA results were obtained.

2. Stain analysis from Trayvon’s shirt.

Five stains identified as A, B, C, D, E and general rubbings from cuff/lower sleeve regions on both arms.

Blood found on stains A, B, D and E.

No chemical indication for the presence of blood on stain C and general rubbings from cuff/lower sleeve regions of both arms.

3. DNA profile of stains:

Stain A: matches Zimmerman’s DNA and the possibility of an additional contributor to this DNA profile.

Stain B: matches Trayvon’s DNA.

Stain D: mixed DNA profiles of at least two individuals found. Major and minor contributors cannot be determined. Zimmerman and Trayvon are included as possible contributors.

Stain E: matches Trayvon’s DNA.

Right cuff/lower sleeve: no DNA results foreign to Trayvon Martin were obtained.

Left cuff/lower sleeve: demonstrated the presence of at least two individuals. “Assuming Trayvon Martin is a contributor to the mixture, foreign DNA results were obtained.

Due to the limited nature of this results, this data is insufficient for inclusion purpose.” No determination can be made regarding the possible contribution of Zimmerman.

4. Stain analysis from Trayvon’s hoodie jacket:

Three stains and general rubbings from cuff/lower sleeve regions on both arms.

Stains A & C: positive chemical indication for the presence of blood.

Stain A: The DNA profile matches Trayvon’s. No DNA results were obtained from stain C.

Stain B and general rubbings from cuff/lower sleeve regions: no indication of blood. No DNA results foreign to Trayvon were obtained from the right or left cuff/lower sleeves.

Here are Zimmerman’s lab findings:

1. Shirt stain analysis. 16 stains analyzed, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O and P.

Fourteen stains gave chemical indication for the presence of blood: A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, O and P. The DNA profiles for all sixteen stains matches the DNA profile from George Zimmerman.

Two stains failed to give indication for the presence of blood: G and H.

2. Jacket stain analysis. 31 stains analyzed: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N , O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA. BB, CC, DD and EE.

17 stains gave chemical indication for blood.

14 stains failed to indicate presence of blood.

9 stains (A, B, C, J, K, L, M, O and P) matches DNA profiles from Zimmerman.

Stain E: showed mixed DNA profile from at least two individuals. Zimmerman’s DNA profile matched but Trayvon cannot be determined.

Stain G: is not interpretable.

Stain I: showed mixed DNA profiles. Zimmerman’s DNA profiled matched but Trayvon’s was excluded.

Stain N: showed mixed DNA profiles. Both Zimmerman and Trayvon matched.

Stain U: showed mixed DNA profiles. DNA profiles for major and minor contributors cannot be determined. Trayvon is included as possible. No determination can be made of Zimmerman’s contribution.

Stain V: showed mixed DNA profiles. Due to limited DNA results -- insufficient for inclusion purposes. No determination can be made regarding Zimmerman or Trayvon.

Stain Z: showed possible non-human DNA.

Stain BB: showed mixed. DNA profiles for major and minor contribution cannot be determined. Zimmerman is included as possibility. No determination for Trayvon.
　
Here’s my take on the above lab report:

On Zimmerman’s weapon: doesn’t seem like Trayvon had his hand on Zimmerman’s weapon.

On Martin’s body and clothing: His fingernail scrapings from both hands showed no sign of foreign DNA let alone Zimmerman’s. It surely casts big doubt on Zimmerman’s claim that Trayvon grabbed his head and slammed it repeatedly into the concrete. Furthermore, neither Zimmerman’s bloods nor DNA were found on the cuffs or lower sleeves of Trayvon’s clothing.

I can’t see how Trayvon did all that punching and head slamming without getting any trace of foreign DNA on his fingernails, hands, cuffs and lower sleeves from Zimmerman who was said to bleed from his nose and his head.

So, to the pro-zimmerman supporters, listen up, your persistent and insistent claim that the physical evidence supported Zimmerman’s claim is out the window because it’s very, very unlikely with this lab report.

Now, on the stain analyses. On Trayvon’s shirt there is only one confirmed stain, Stain A, that can be conclusively attributed to Zimmerman. I don’t know the stain’s location and how it got there because there was no Zimmerman blood or DNA found on Trayvon‘s hoodie jacket.

If the blood stain is on the back, it could support an eyewitness account of Zimmerman standing over Trayvon after the shooting. The hoodie might have pulled up during the struggle and exposed the inner shirt where Zimmerman’s blood dripped down from the back of his head or nose.

Now on Zimmerman’s clothing stains, most of them were from his blood. On those that showed mixed DNA profiles, most were Zimmerman’s. Trayvon were either conclusively excluded or not determinable. Only on e stain, stain N, show conclusively a match for both Zimmerman and Trayvon. This could be a blood splatter from Trayvon when he was shot.

But, overall the almost lack of Zimmerman’s blood on Trayvon and Trayvon’s blood on Zimmerman casts doubt on Zimmerman’s story that Trayvon was on top slamming his head into the concrete when he fired at Trayvon in close range.The lab report could support the possibility that Trayvon and
Zimmerman were standing apart when the shot was fired.

 

[joko104]

^ Your analysis is nonsensical. Zimmerman never claimed Martin was scratching him.

Back in my uncivilized days I slammed a child-abuser's head and face so many times into a double tempered glass cooler door in a C-store it broke both windows. There was no blood on me.

There is something called gravity. Objects including blood fall down - not up, sideways or around a person's head and up into the air. Really, there is such a thing as gravity.

 

[Excon]

^ Your analysis is nonsensical. Zimmerman never claimed Martin was scratching him.

Back in my uncivilized days I slammed a child-abuser's head and face so many times into a double tempered glass cooler door in a C-store it broke both windows. There was no blood on me.

There is something called gravity. Objects including blood fall down - not up, sideways or around a person's head and up into the air. Really, there is such a thing as gravity.

Absolutely.

Apparently he doesn't understand, the difference between slamming one's head into the ground and scratching, and the other's skin being found underneath the nails being an indication of self-defense.

 

[dolphinocean]

Absolutely.

Apparently he doesn't understand, the difference between slamming one's head into the ground and scratching, and the other's skin being found underneath the nails being an indication of self-defense.

Tell me the difference. If you slammed someone's head repeatedly into the concrete, would you expect a smeared or smudged round bloody wound or do you expect it to look like a cut with linear edge?

There is no scratch marks nor "the other's skin being found underneath the nails" in either of the two people, so please don't make up stuffs here.

 

[dolphinocean]

^ Your analysis is nonsensical. Zimmerman never claimed Martin was scratching him.

Back in my uncivilized days I slammed a child-abuser's head and face so many times into a double tempered glass cooler door in a C-store it broke both windows. There was no blood on me.

There is something called gravity. Objects including blood fall down - not up, sideways or around a person's head and up into the air. Really, there is such a thing as gravity.

You don't agree with my analysis, that doesn't mean it is nonsensical.

You said, "Zimmerman never claimed Martin was scratching him." Did I even say Zimmerman claimed Martin was scratching him? I certainly did not. Therefore, you're making a straw man argument.

The point about "scratching" is that Zimmerman did not show he had exhausted all possible physical resistance to escape the situation he caused to happen.

In other words, by his action Zimmerman caused reasonable fear in Trayvon which inevitably resulted in the physical confrontation. Zimmerman had the duty to use reasonable amount of force, fist with fist, in proportional to the threat from Trayvon which he caused it to happen before he could resort to use of lethal weapon against an unarmed individual. Even then, there must be an imminent threat present to justify Zimmerman’s use of force.

But, the physical evidence does not support Zimmerman's story.

Tell me how did Trayvon managed to get a good grip around Zimmerman's head to slammed it repeatedly into the concrete without getting any blood stains on his fingers, hands, cuffs, or lower sleeves from the back of Zimmerman's bloody scalp or from the bloody nose he purportedly suffered when he was said to have been sucker punched by Trayvon to the ground? Did gravity fail to act on Zimmerman's bleeding nose at your convenience then?

How could Trayvon not have any of Zimmerman's skin cell DNA on his finger nails or cuffs or lower sleeves when he was doing all the head grabbing?


　



　

 

[Excon]

Tell me the difference. If you slammed someone's head repeatedly into the concrete, would you expect a smeared or smudged round bloody wound or do you expect it to look like a cut with linear edge?

I have already told you I split a guys eyebrow open. If you don't realize it, it looks like a straight cut through the skin.

There is no scratch marks nor "the other's skin being found underneath the nails" in either of the two people, so please don't make up stuffs here.

You misunderstand what I wrote.

Regardless.
Skin under the other's nails is usually an indication of a defensive posture.

 

[dolphinocean]

I have already told you I split a guys eyebrow open. If you don't realize it, it looks like a straight cut through the skin.

And you think I would just take your word at face value without a medical report? Where's your police report or a police picture of the wound?

You misunderstand what I wrote.

Regardless.
Skin under the other's nails is usually an indication of a defensive posture.

Your misunderstand isn't my misunderstanding, dude.

There is no skin or skin tissue in either Zimmerman or Trayvon.

 

[Excon]

And you think I would just take your word at face value without a medical report? Where's your police report or a police picture of the wound?[/QUOTE]Pathetic.
You have absolutely no understanding of the things you say, and when real life examples are provided to explain to you why you don't have any understanding, you want to demand proof.

Your misunderstand isn't my misunderstanding, dude.

There is no skin or skin tissue in either Zimmerman or Trayvon.

Again.
It is your misunderstanding as to what was said.


Let me repeat it so everybody can see just how dishonest you are being.

"Apparently he doesn't understand, the difference between slamming one's head into the ground and scratching, and the other's skin being found underneath the nails being an indication of self-defense."​

Both things I mentioned in the above quote, go directly to your making a big deal about Trayvon not having Zmmerman's skin underneath his nails.


You don't usually get skin underneath your nails being the aggressor as the evidence says Trayvon was.
Do you get that?
Do you understand now?

 

[dolphinocean]

You have absolutely no understanding of the things you say, and when real life examples are provided to explain to you why you don't have any understanding, you want to demand proof.

I had been involved in many fights in my life since grade one. Involving in a fight doesn’t mean that you get to know every little things or details happening while you’re in the fight. So no, you are wrong on the wound.

Like I said, I don’t take your word for it. Show me the police report and the picture of the cut wound that your said resulted from your head slamming.
　

Again.
It is your misunderstanding as to what was said.


Let me repeat it so everybody can see just how dishonest you are being.

"Apparently he doesn't understand, the difference between slamming one's head into the ground and scratching, and the other's skin being found underneath the nails being an indication of self-defense."Both things I mentioned in the above quote, go directly to your making a big deal about Trayvon not having Zmmerman's skin underneath his nails.


You don't usually get skin underneath your nails being the aggressor as the evidence says Trayvon was.
Do you get that?
Do you understand now?

Again, your misunderstanding is not my misunderstanding.

The scratching part I mentioned in my blog article is about Zimmerman not fighting back first with whatever means of disposal he could have used with his two hands to fight back.

This is evidenced by Zimmerman’s lack of mention in his story and also in lack of scratching marks in Trayvon’s face or body.

Certainly, if Zimmerman had scratched Trayvon’s face or body, he would have some skin tissues in his (Zimmerman’s) fingernails. Wouldn’t that be so?

But, my fingernail forensic analysis had nothing to do with the hypothetical scenario of Zimmerman doing a desperate scratching act in self-defense.


It was just simply a hypothetical proposition that Zimmerman should have done first before firing the shot. My fingernail argument was simply about Trayvon's grip action in head slamming. That’s where you and zoko get all the points mixed up and lumped them together as if I was making one and same point.


Here’s what I said with regards to Trayvon’s fingernail forensic:

“On Martin’s body and clothing: His fingernail scrapings from both hands showed no sign of foreign DNA let alone Zimmerman’s. It surely casts big doubt on Zimmerman’s claim that Trayvon grabbed his head and slammed it repeatedly into the concrete.

Furthermore, neither Zimmerman’s bloods nor DNA were found on the cuffs or lower sleeves of Trayvon’s clothing.

I can’t see how Trayvon did all that punching and head slamming without getting any trace of foreign DNA on his fingernails, hands, cuffs and lower sleeves from Zimmerman who was said to bleed from his nose and his head. “

If Trayvon was said to do all the punching and head slamming, it is very unlikely that he would come out with a clean bill from the forensic analyses of his fingers, hands, shirt and hoodie sweater cuffs and the lower sleeves of both clothing.

How could Trayvon not get any of Zimmerman’s blood on his hands if he sucker punched him into a bloody broken nose and then had his hands covered Zimmerman’s mouth and his bloody nose?

Explain that, will you?

As to skin tissue transfer, it is not illogical to expect Zimmerman’s skin cells to transfer onto Trayvon’s fingers and hands if not the fingernails or the cuffs.

Zimmerman’s head was shaved and it would be hard for Trayvon to hold onto if he didn’t grab it tight and hard. In doing so, there bound to be some skin cell with Zimmerman’s DNA being transferred to Trayvon’s hands.

After all, the forensic results found blood stains from other individuals apart from Trayvon and Zimmerman that were found on the handgun grip and foreign bloodstains not from Tryvon found on Zimmerman’s jacket. They also found possible non-human DNA.

How is it possible?

Apparently, foreign bloodstains and DNA from other individuals and animals were transferred on non-violent casual contact from other individuals and animal source onto Zimmerman’s handgun grip and clothing from the past contact.

So, how is it not possible to expect Ziummerman’s DNA to be found on Trayvon’s fingernails, fingers, hands or cuffs/lower sleeves in a very close encounter and violent struggle?

 

[Excon]

There is no reason to respond to your silliness any further.
You clearly are incapable of reading and understanding what was said and why it was said.
And proves that there is no reason to continue pointing out your errors to you.

You obviously think you have astounding prowess at analyzing, when you don't have the ability to any degree worth noting.

So please continue with your ridiculous claims and convoluted thoughts.

It is very entertaining.