TalkLeft Discussion Forums

State v. George Zimmerman (Pre-Trial) => Evidence Discussion => Topic started by: nomatter_nevermind on January 11, 2013, 10:50:54 PM

Title: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 11, 2013, 10:50:54 PM
I'm starting a new thread for these two items. I don't like discussing them in a thread (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2055.0.html) whose very title includes disputed information.

The report the headphones were in his pocket could have (and likely did) come from Diana Smith's report on page 80

I think it came from CST Smith herself, making a careless entry when she logged the items. Her report doesn't say all the DMS-10 items were in pockets.

I think the letters on the evidence tags are the initials of the person who logged the item. The first item is Zimmerman's gun, and it has Timothy Smith's initials.

It seems ME Investigator Tara Malphurs collected the items on Martin's person. That probably included the earphones because the blanket had been covering them, at the time the other items on the ground were being identified and given object markers.

Malphurs would have given the items she collected to CST Smith, who transported and logged them.

CST Smith's report (80/184) doesn't say she witnessed the collection of those items.

Comparing the reports, I think the ME people arrived around the time Smith and Ciesla finished measuring the items on the ground. Smith proceeded to collect those items, while Ciesla observed the preliminary examination of the body.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 11, 2013, 11:42:37 PM
nomatter_nevermind, you've said several times that you think the headphones were found on the ground near Martin's body. I doubt that for at least three reasons. First, they were not marked with an evidence marker like the cell phone, flashlights, medical kit, and plastic bags. Second, CST Smith specifically said they were in Martin's pockets or on him. Third, they were in the same DMS-10 group as other items which were certainly on Martin's person.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 12, 2013, 12:08:09 AM
It seems ME Investigator Tara Malphurs collected the items on Martin's person. That probably included the earphones because the blanket had been covering them, at the time the other items on the ground were being identified and given object markers.

Malphurs would have given the items she collected to CST Smith, who transported and logged them.

CST Smith's report (80/184) doesn't say she witnessed the collection of those items.

Comparing the reports, I think the ME people arrived around the time Smith and Ciesla finished measuring the items on the ground. Smith proceeded to collect those items, while Ciesla observed the preliminary examination of the body.

According to the Crime Scene Contamination Log (48-49/284), CST Smith arrived at 8:03 PM, Malphurs at 9:45 PM.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 12, 2013, 12:15:57 AM
Ciesla arrived at 8:14 PM.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 12, 2013, 02:44:45 AM
Did Tara Malphurs not write a report? Her title is M.E. Investigator, and she seemed to be deeply involved in the initial investigation. It's hard to believe she didn't submit a report, but I haven't been able to find one. As nomatter_nevermind mentioned in the DeeDee thread, she's been deposed by the defense, in a deposition that allowed for up to 90 minutes. From the fairly lengthy time, it seems apparent the defense was quite interested in what she had to say. I sure wish we could see some information from the deposition.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: AghastInFL on January 12, 2013, 08:16:02 AM
I'm starting a new thread for these two items. I don't like discussing them in a thread (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2055.0.html) whose very title includes disputed information.

(Snipd)

Pg 22/184

DMS-10 PERSONAL EFFECTS
One (1) red "711" brand name lighter, photo button, bag of skittles, and headphones.
and collected from with in the victim's pockets.

I know what the rest of your comment states; I only wish to make one concise point. I did not start a thread erroneously the title came from the evidence.

Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 12, 2013, 05:19:53 PM
I did not start a thread erroneously

I didn't say you did.

There is no need to make this personal.

Quote
the title came from the evidence.

It came from cherry-picking one piece of evidence, ignoring other evidence, and thus representing as a fact something that is actually in controversy.

I like for thread titles to be neutral, indicating the subjects, not taking sides on controversies regarding those subjects.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 12, 2013, 06:57:10 PM
Did Tara Malphurs not write a report?

Not that I know of.

There is a brief summary of her actions at the scene in the ME report, 137/184. (http://www.axiomamnesia.com/TrayvonMartinFiles/Trayvon-Martin-George-Zimmerman-FULL-case-report-documents.pdf) It says Malphurs arrived on scene about 9:44, and left about 10:10.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 13, 2013, 05:45:32 AM

CST Smith specifically said they were in Martin's pockets or on him.

That's what her report says (80/184 (http://www.axiomamnesia.com/TrayvonMartinFiles/Trayvon-Martin-George-Zimmerman-FULL-case-report-documents.pdf)).

In the report, unlike the log entry, Smith did not use the word 'collected'. Taken literally, she was only indicating that she believed these items had been on Martin's person at some time.

That is how I would expect her to write, if Tara Malphurs handed her the items in bags, having collected them while Smith's attention was elsewhere.

I don't believe CST Smith knew exactly where each item was collected. Her report was carefully vague. Her log entry was carelessly specific. She was probably tired, and maybe in a hurry to end her shift.

The log entry said both the button and headphones were 'collected from with in [sic] the victim's pockets.'

Sgt. Stacie McCoy reported that she saw the ear phones (17/184).

Quote
I observed a can of Arizona Ice Tea and a pair of ear phones, in close proximity to the victim's body.

I have seen no explanation for why she would make this up. Nor have I seen one for why she would be hallucinating ear phones, while the real ear phones were out of sight in Martin's pocket.

Ayala allegedly told SAO he saw the button (2/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)).

Quote
Ayala saw a gunshot wound on his torso under a photo button that Martin was wearing.

The same questions arise. Why would Ayala make this up? Why would he hallucinate a button, when he had no reason to suspect there actually was a button?

Sgt. Ciesla's report corroborates McCoy and Ayala (20/184).

Quote
The victim had $ 40.15 in US currency, a bag of Skittles candy, a red 7-11 red[sic] lighter in his pockets, headphones next to him, and a photo pin on his sweatshirt.

Ciesla's report doesn't say that he saw this himself. It does indicate that Ciesla was watching for at least part of the examination .

Quote
When the ME investigator lifted the victim's clothing I saw a single gunshot wound to the chest.

If Ciesla didn't watch Malphurs collect the items, it was most likely from her that he got his information on their locations. It's possible that Malphurs left without giving Ciesla this information, and he went to McCoy and Ayala to fill him in before he wrote his report. But all these suppositions seem less to likely to me than CST Smith getting careless with one log entry.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 13, 2013, 01:19:00 PM
I don't doubt the headphones were at some point next to Martin, just as the drink can was at some point next to Martin. If the headphones were on the ground beside Martin, Smith wouldn't have had to wait for Malphurs; she would seen them, and probably assigned an evidence number to them that was lower than the number assigned to the money in Martin's pocket.

If Smith didn't observe the evidence collection by Malphurs, that's all the more reason to find it almost unbelievable that Malphurs didn't prepare a written report.

Unless other evidence comes out, I think the button was pinned to the hoodie, just as several people stated.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 13, 2013, 01:50:50 PM
Unless other evidence comes out, I think the button was pinned to the hoodie, just as several people stated.

One thing I do wonder about is why Malphurs would remove a button pinned to the hoodie. That seems like a poor choice, given that the button was said to be near the bullet hole, and therefore the button location might be significant. Also, why is there no report of the button being tested for DNA?
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 13, 2013, 06:51:45 PM
One thing I do wonder about is why Malphurs would remove a button pinned to the hoodie. That seems like a poor choice, given that the button was said to be near the bullet hole, and therefore the button location might be significant.

My feeling is exactly the opposite. To me it seems obvious the button should be removed and bagged separately.

The location would be recorded photographically.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 13, 2013, 08:11:03 PM
My feeling is exactly the opposite. To me it seems obvious the button should be removed and bagged separately.

The location would be recorded photographically.

I didn't say it should have been bagged with the hoodie. I don't think it should have been removed in the field. It should have been left pinned on the hoodie until after the hoodie was taken off of Martin, and both sides photographed. And no matter when it was removed, it should have been tested for DNA and firearm residue.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 13, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
If the headphones were on the ground beside Martin, Smith wouldn't have had to wait for Malphurs; she would seen them

If they were close to the body, they would have been under the blanket.

80/184, unredacted 13/29 (http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Pages-from-Police-Reports-without-statements-redacted.pdf)
Quote
I arrived on scene at approximatly 1955 hours and met with Officer Ayala and Officer Mead who briefed me on the scene. . . . I walked through the scene with the officers and they pointed out items of evidence . . . the victim's body that was covered by a yellow medical blanket . . .

Martin was pronounced about 7:30. It seems likely the body would have been covered by the time CST Smith arrived around 7:55. Her report indicates it was covered when she first inspected the scene.

Sgt. Raimondo covered the body (16/184).
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 13, 2013, 10:39:59 PM
I didn't say it should have been bagged with the hoodie. I don't think it should have been removed in the field.

Sorry, I'm being a little slow on this. I see what you mean now. The button could have been left in place, and collected at the ME's office, like the watch. As to whether it should have been, you may be right. I don't feel qualified to have an opinion.

Looking over the reports, I noticed that CST Smith traveled to Volusia County to pick up the items collected there. Her report doesn't say she logged them in, but it's likely she would have, to keep the chain of custody short. So, items collected at the ME's office were tagged ME, regardless of who logged them in. The items Smith brought from the scene were tagged DMS, even when they were collected by Malphurs.

I'm not saying this is good or bad. I'm just trying to keep track.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 13, 2013, 11:14:59 PM
If they were close to the body, they would have been under the blanket.

CST Smith arrived at 8:03 PM and Malphurs arrived at 9:45 PM. Santiago arrived at 8:10 PM, shortly after Smith and well before Malphurs. He says (16/184):

Quote
On February 26, 2012, I was notified to respond to the area of Retreat View Circle reference a shooting. I then notified Inv. Singleton to also respond. Upon my arrival and entering the crime scene, I observed a black male, later identified as, Trayvon Martin lying on the ground with his face up with his head to the west  Martin was wearing a grey sweatshirt and light colored shorts and white tennis shoes.

Smith photographed the scene, so quite likely had the yellow covering removed while she photographed areas around the body.

In any event, I think it somewhat unlikely that the headphones would end up loose on the ground so close to Martin that they'd be covered with the same blanket. The altercation apparently moved some distance, and Martin moved after he was shot. If the headphones were to fall to the ground, I think they'd probably have fallen earlier, so there'd be some luck involved in Martin ending up right next to them.

Malpurs was listed in the first discovery as a "B" witness. That seems like a strange designation for someone so much involved in the investigation, especially someone who didn't write a report. "B" witnesses normally can only be deposed by leave of the court. I don't know if the state changed her to an "A" witness, or if she was deposed by mutual consent between the defense and prosecution.

(In passing, I assume Tara Malphurs is the same person as Tara Clark, with perhaps a change in marital status.)
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 13, 2013, 11:29:07 PM
Smith photographed the scene, so quite likely had the yellow covering removed while she photographed areas around the body.

In any event, I think it somewhat unlikely that the headphones would end up loose on the ground so close to Martin that they'd be covered with the same blanket. The altercation apparently moved some distance, and Martin moved after he was shot. If the headphones were to fall to the ground, I think they'd probably have fallen earlier, so there'd be some luck involved in Martin ending up right next to them.

I don't understand why all this conjecture should outweigh the plain statement of Sgt. Stacie McCoy that she saw the ear phones next to Martin's body.

You still haven't offered an explanation for why she would make that up, or make such an odd mistake.

Quote
(In passing, I assume Tara Malphurs is the same person as Tara Clark, with perhaps a change in marital status.)

I don't recall seeing the name 'Tara Clark'.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 13, 2013, 11:49:54 PM
Santiago arrived at 8:10 PM

The contamination log (48-49/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)) says 8:20. I don't see an arrival time in Santiago's report.

But, fair enough. Santiago's report suggests the body was left uncovered for longer than I thought. That doesn't change CST Smith's report, which indicates the body was covered when she first inspected the scene.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 13, 2013, 11:55:25 PM
I don't understand why all this conjecture should outweigh the plain statement of Sgt. Stacie McCoy that she saw the ear phones next to Martin's body.

You still haven't offered an explanation for why she would make that up, or make such an odd mistake.

I don't recall seeing the name 'Tara Clark'.

I've already said at some point they were next to the body. The report was written on March 9, so it may not reflect the sequence of events exactly. You have yet to explain why you ignore Smith's direct statement that the headphones were among the articles in Martin's pockets or on him. The difference is, there's circumstantial evidence to support that: the grouping of the headphones with other items that were undoubtedly on Martin's person, the evidence number, which is after money found in Martin's pockets, and most of all, the lack of an object marker. All those were things that occurred on the night of the shooting, not reconstructions two weeks later.

"T. Clark" and "Tara Clark" are mentioned in Serino's report on pages 37-38 of the 184 page PDF.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 14, 2013, 12:00:43 AM
The contamination log (48-49/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)) says 8:20. I don't see an arrival time in Santiago's report.

But, fair enough. Santiago's report suggests the body was left uncovered for longer than I thought. That doesn't change CST Smith's report, which indicates the body was covered when she first inspected the scene.

It doesn't have to change it, since I offered the very reasonable hypothesis that Smith had the cover removed when she photographed the area around the body. If it was covered when Smith arrived but not covered when Santiago arrived, the cover had to have been removed.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 14, 2013, 12:07:44 AM
"T. Clark" and "Tara Clark" are mentioned in Serino's report on pages 37-38 of the 184 page PDF.

Perhaps a better theory than marriage or divorce is that Serino just got her name wrong.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 14, 2013, 12:50:42 AM
I've already said at some point they were next to the body.

Right. Sorry. I was about to respond to that, when I saw your later comments. I got caught up in details, and forgot that point.

I don't understand what you are suggesting. Tara Malphurs took the earphones off of Martin, and instead of bagging them, dropped them on the ground?

Malphurs reportedly told SAO that she didn't remember the beverage can (35/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)). I think she most likely didn't see it, because it had already been collected by the time she arrived.

McCoy reported seeing the can and ear phones at the same time.

The can is DMS-8. If the items were numbered in the order they were collected, that undermines my theory that CST Smith was busy collecting while Malphurs examined the body.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 14, 2013, 01:44:34 AM
I don't understand what you are suggesting. Tara Malphurs took the earphones off of Martin, and instead of bagging them, dropped them on the ground?

That's a good point, and suggests to me the explanation is, as I suggested in the DeeDee thread:

Quote
Another possibility is they were not on his head, but hung  by the wire that went inside the hoodie through the neck hole.

That would both answer the question of why the seemed to be next to Martin. and why they would be considered to be "on" Martin.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 14, 2013, 06:52:06 AM
"T. Clark" and "Tara Clark" are mentioned in Serino's report on pages 37-38 of the 184 page PDF.

Thanks.

I agree. Serino named Clark as the person he contacted at the ME's office, and the person who responded to the scene. It seems, for whatever reason, he was using 'Tara Clark' for Tara Malphurs.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: AghastInFL on January 19, 2013, 08:23:27 AM
Right. Sorry. I was about to respond to that, when I saw your later comments. I got caught up in details, and forgot that point.

I don't understand what you are suggesting. Tara Malphurs took the earphones off of Martin, and instead of bagging them, dropped them on the ground?

Malphurs reportedly told SAO that she didn't remember the beverage can (35/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)). I think she most likely didn't see it, because it had already been collected by the time she arrived.

McCoy reported seeing the can and ear phones at the same time.

The can is DMS-8. If the items were numbered in the order they were collected, that undermines my theory that CST Smith was busy collecting while Malphurs examined the body.
I told myself I would never comment on this thread but find impossible not to point out that the obvious contradiction in this argument.

It is accepted that the can of WFJC was in the hoodie pocket.  McCoy is the report you keep referring to as evidence to your POV and yet she sees the item together with another of the known pocket contents.
How can you ignore that?
That they are not mentioned by Livingston is not abject proof she did not inadvertently cause them to fall from the pocket... If they are threaded through the hood in a photo fine... OTOH If they are a wadded mess on the ground, that is entirely different.
IMO only a photo will answer the question.
Quote
Posted by: MJW
« on: January 13, 2013, 03:50:50 PM » Insert Quote
Quote from: MJW on January 13, 2013, 03:19:00 PM
Unless other evidence comes out, I think the button was pinned to the hoodie, just as several people stated.

One thing I do wonder about is why Malphurs would remove a button pinned to the hoodie. That seems like a poor choice, given that the button was said to be near the bullet hole, and therefore the button location might be significant. Also, why is there no report of the button being tested for DNA?
Agreed, why remove the button they lifted the shirt to try and seal the wound, in the photos it is not cut later so the EMT did not use scissors at the scene... Why was it removed?
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: AghastInFL on January 19, 2013, 08:28:24 AM
Sundance at The Conservative Treehouse writes:
Quote
The discrepancies between the “in pocket” evidence vs. “out of pocket” evidence is easily reconciled. I have actually spoken to these people, not just read their reports. the pocket contents were removed when looking for ID. They were replaced. Various PD folks saw the actual body during this process, that’s why some saw them on the ground, others did not.

The only things OUTSIDE of the pockets in the crime scene were the items marked and photographed with the exception of the Watermelon Juice can. That was photographed on top of the victim (tarp covering him) because it could not be placed easily back into his pockets. That’s why there are pictures of that item *on* the tarp at the scene.

If it was not marked, photgraphed, and location identified, it was in his pockets. Period.

That’s why it is not in dispute.
An interesting argument.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 19, 2013, 09:49:09 AM
That they are not mentioned by Livingston is not abject proof she did not inadvertently cause them to fall from the pocket...

I agree.

It's not even proof that she didn't deliberately remove the earphones.

I recall that on the 'pockets' thread, someone once suggested the latter scenario was the most likely. I disagreed. My argument was always that the scenario wasn't highly likely, not that I would rule it out.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: AghastInFL on January 19, 2013, 10:41:33 AM
Sundance at The Conservative Treehouse writes:
An interesting argument.
The button of course refutes this argument, at least in part.
As written before, both Ayala and Ciesla mention the button and its location converse to the evidence log.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: RickyJim on January 19, 2013, 11:03:22 AM
So did Martin take off the headset and put them in his pocket before meeting Zimmerman or didn't he?  The fate of the DeeDee story hangs in the balance. 
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 19, 2013, 10:27:20 PM
Stay tuned for the next thrilling episode.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: unitron on January 20, 2013, 05:09:51 AM
It seems to me most likely that he'd have the phone in a pocket somewhere instead of in his hands, with the earphones/microphone cord set plugged into it and run up under the hoodie to his ears.

Which brings up the question of when and how the headset got unplugged from the phone and the phone got out of the pocket and onto the ground.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 20, 2013, 02:22:47 PM
An interesting argument.

A tall story.

There was no reason for anything to be returned to a pocket after being removed. If the officers were in such a hurry to identify Martin that they went through his pockets without waiting for the ME investigator, they could also bag and tag the items themselves. At the least, they would hold the items in gloved hands, not throw them on the ground.

We not only have the reports, we have summaries of SAO interviews with some of the crime scene investigators. Nothing in the discovery suggests that they went through Martin's pockets before Malphurs arrived.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 20, 2013, 05:54:07 PM
Nothing in the discovery suggests that they went through Martin's pockets before Malphurs arrived.

I disagree. Your favorite headphone witness, McCoy, says:

Quote
I instructed Officer T. Smith, to have provide medical care to the suspect, reference visible blood on his face and then to transport the suspect to the SPD, for everyone's safety. I also instructed Officer A. Johnson to accompany Officer T. Smith to SPD for officer safety. I instructed Officer C. Davila to attempt to locale the victim's identification, to no avail.

The victim is described as a younger B/M, in his teens. I observed a single gun shot wound to his chest. I observed a package of Skittles in the front pocket of the victims sweatshirt. I observed a can of Arizona iced tea and a pair of ear phones, in close proximity to the victim's body. Scattered nearby, I observed a small flashlight, cell phone and car keys with a small flashlight.

That more than suggests they looked for the ID quite early on, it  strongly suggests it.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 20, 2013, 09:35:51 PM
Nothing in the discovery suggests that they went through Martin's pockets before Malphurs arrived.

I disagree. Your favorite headphone witness, McCoy, says:

Right you are.

My bad.

ETA: Of course, if it was McCoy who ordered the search of the pockets, it's not likely that this was the explanation for her reporting seeing the ear phones next to the body. She would know why they were there, and that the location had no evidentiary significance.

Again, it makes no sense that any of the items would be placed on the ground. That would be deliberately contaminating evidence.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on January 20, 2013, 10:58:12 PM
Of course, if it was McCoy who ordered the search of the pockets, it's not likely that this was the explanation for her reporting seeing the ear phones next to the body. She would know why they were there, and that the location had no evidentiary significance.

I don't think that's necessarily true. She may have gone away from the body to attend to something else, and not watched the the actual search. In any event, the evidence is so contradictory, I don't where the earphones were. I still think the best explanation is that they were on the ground, but attached by the wire. That's not completely satisfactory, but at least it somewhat explains why were seen near the body but weren't given an object marker. I think the location is known by those involved in the case, and will eventually come out.

If the ear phones were separate, even if the body and earphones were covered by the blanket all the time Smith was there prior to Malphurs's arrival (which I very much doubt), I still think someone would have mentioned them, and they would have been marked.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DebFrmHell on January 21, 2013, 03:07:25 AM
At first read, the explanation makes some sense.  Until you read it a couple of times, then it raises some questions.  In any event, it doesn't explain the button.  TO ME, if the button is in question, so are the rest of the items.   

If SD had photographic proof, I doubt that he would have qualms about cropping the just earbuds showing where they were and posting them.  When he says that he doesn't because it is irrelevant I don't believe him.  He is making sure that no one files an complaint against him.  He needs someone to post them first so he can screenshot it for use on his site.  I don't blame him there but he comes across as insincere.

Just IMO.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 21, 2013, 04:14:15 AM
I'm not going to discuss some blogger's sincerity or lack thereof.

I think it may be useful to state that my practice is to disregard all unsubstantiated claims of inside information.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DebFrmHell on January 21, 2013, 05:14:30 AM
Nicely put.  When I grow up I want to be you.  8-)
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: annoyedbeyond on January 21, 2013, 07:28:06 AM
A tall story.

There was no reason for anything to be returned to a pocket after being removed. If the officers were in such a hurry to identify Martin that they went through his pockets without waiting for the ME investigator, they could also bag and tag the items themselves. At the least, they would hold the items in gloved hands, not throw them on the ground.

We not only have the reports, we have summaries of SAO interviews with some of the crime scene investigators. Nothing in the discovery suggests that they went through Martin's pockets before Malphurs arrived.

If they're just searching for ID, then yes, other contents will often get put back into pockets instead of bagged at the scene.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: leftwig on January 21, 2013, 02:27:36 PM
It seems to me most likely that he'd have the phone in a pocket somewhere instead of in his hands, with the earphones/microphone cord set plugged into it and run up under the hoodie to his ears.

Agreed, just like we see him in the 7-11.

Quote
Which brings up the question of when and how the headset got unplugged from the phone and the phone got out of the pocket and onto the ground.

Also agree that this has potential significance.  If they were still running up through his hoodie, then that means he didn't take them off before the conflict.  Not sure that would mean much.  If they were however found in his pockets, that would mean he took them off and placed them there before confronting GZ.  That would have serious implications for Dee Dee's account and provide insight to TM's state of mind before facing off with GZ. 

I do think its unclear where the headphones were, but you know the defense is going to draw from any evidence that they were found in the pockets and will back it up with the fact that they weren't bagged and tested separately like every other item not found on TM's person.  The only reasons I  think of for them not having been  bagged and tagged is either the police messed up or they weren't on the ground.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on January 22, 2013, 07:09:47 PM
Nicely put.

Thank you.

It seems a bit stuffy to me. I guess that comes of choosing words carefully, to address a somewhat delicate matter.

I just want to talk about the substance of this case, not to start any tiresome and time-wasting feuds.

Quote
When I grow up I want to be you.  8-)

I don't think it would take me long to talk you out of that.   :)   ;)
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 22, 2013, 07:29:18 PM
Responding to post on another thread.

The interview was conducted on April 2, 2012 -- over a month later. Why assume he hallucinated when we could assume he misremembered? By that time, everyone had heard the NEN call where GZ said TM was wearing the button. Why was the photo button specifically mentioned in that very brief interview summary? For all we know, Gilbreath reminded Ayala of the button, and Ayala said the gunshot wound must have been under it. What does "under a photo button" mean, anyway? Lower than the button, or covered by the button? I don't have much faith in an interview summary that doesn't make that clear.

I don't put much confidence in any of those interview summaries. I grant that this one might be in error for some reason.

For the button to be covering the wound, it would have to have been pinned to the shirt after the gunshot. Who would do that, and why?

If that were true, it would be remarkable. I think there would have been some mention of it by now.

If the wound were covered by the button, Ayala wouldn't have seen it without removing the button. Conceivable that he wouldn't mention that, but not likely.

In some contexts, 'under the button' could mean covered by it. In this context, I think it clearly doesn't.

If Ayala didn't see a button, I think he would just say so.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 22, 2013, 08:26:00 PM
I  agree "under the photo button button" almost certainly meant lower than the button. But if you compare the position of the button in the 7-Eleven video with the position of the entry wound as shown in the autopsy diagram, it would seem the entry hole must have been very close to the button. Yet no one on the night of the shooting saw fit to mention it or treat the button as a significant piece of evidence.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 22, 2013, 10:00:44 PM
Yet no one on the night of the shooting saw fit to mention it or treat the button as a significant piece of evidence.

The button was mentioned by being logged, like the other evidence.

I don't know how else you would expect the button to be mentioned on 2/26, or how it wasn't treated 'as a significant piece of evidence'.

Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 22, 2013, 11:27:45 PM
The button was mentioned by being logged, like the other evidence.

I don't know how else you would expect the button to be mentioned on 2/26, or how it wasn't treated 'as a significant piece of evidence'.

I would expect that some of the first-responders would have noted in their initial reports that the bullet entered right next to a photo button. Apparently that was significant enough to mention a month later in a nine-sentence interview summary. It was logged along with various other items found in TM's pockets or close proximity without bothering to record where it was located. If it were treated as a significant piece of evidence, it would have been separately bagged, or, more likely, covered to protect it from the elements but left on the hoodie.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 22, 2013, 11:36:38 PM
I would expect that some of the first-responders would have noted in their initial reports that the bullet entered right next to a photo button.

Those reports were written after 2/26. A number of them mention the button, though not its proximity to the wound.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 23, 2013, 12:36:52 AM
Those reports were written after 2/26. A number of them mention the button, though not its proximity to the wound.

Some were written 2/27. I could have missed some, but the only early one I know of that mentions the button is Ciela's 3/2 report on page 20/184.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 23, 2013, 01:13:03 AM

I could have missed some, but the only early one I know of that mentions the button is Ciela's 3/2 report on page 20/184.

I guess you don't count CST Smith's report, 3/6, 80/184, (http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/357450/trayvon-martin-documents-ocr.pdf) as 'early'.

Sgt. Santiago, 3/2, 16/184, listed some of the items collected from Martin's person. I thought he included the button, but I was mistaken.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 23, 2013, 01:46:27 AM
I guess you don't count CST Smith's report, 3/6, 80/184, (http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/357450/trayvon-martin-documents-ocr.pdf) as 'early'.

I didn't notice it, or I would have counted it, but it seems curiously noncommittal about where the items were found. The evidence bag says the DSM-10 items were "in the victim's pocket or in close proximity." What's that supposed to mean? Is a button pinned to TM's chest in close proximity to his pocket? How hard is it to record where the items were actually located?
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 23, 2013, 01:50:37 AM
I'm pretty sure the defense and prosecution know by now where the photo button was, so it's probably somewhat pointless to worry about it.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 23, 2013, 02:32:22 AM
I didn't notice it, or I would have counted it, but it seems curiously noncommittal about where the items were found.

I discussed that in a post (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2288.msg105365.html#msg105365) near the beginning of the thread. I think her attention was elsewhere, probably collecting the items on the ground, when Malphurs was examining the body.

I'm pretty sure the defense and prosecution know by now where the photo button was

Of course. They have the photos of the body, and have deposed the people who worked the scene. I don't expect this to be an issue at trial.

ETA: Malphurs probably wrote the label for the evidence bag. Smith may have copied it for the log, overlooking the last words.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DebFrmHell on May 23, 2013, 08:52:34 AM
TO ME!  The thing about not testing the button is if it was in the pocket.  There are a number of photos of Martin at the scene that should explain where the ear buds and the button were actually located.

IMO AGAIN.  I think that button was in his pocket.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 23, 2013, 11:27:01 PM
Responding to post on another thread.

I think its a fair assumption if he said the gunshot was "under" the button, that the button was covering it.

Discussed here. (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2288.msg109732.html#msg109732) 

Quote
"under" would be the precise word to use if an object was covering another, not vertically above.

I disagree. 'Under' is ambiguous, not a precise word for either case.

Quote
I wouldn't assume he hallucinated anything, but maybe misremembered, depending on how much time had elapsed before his report was taken.

It was 4/2/12, about five weeks after the shooting.

People often misremember exactly what they saw, or where or when they saw it. It's not likely someone would remember seeing something they didn't see at all, unless it was somehow suggested to him.

By the 4/2 interview, I think everyone connected to the investigation would know whether the button was found in a pocket or pinned to the hoodie. There would be no reason for anyone to suggest to Ayala that he had seen something different from what others saw. Nor does it seem likely Ayala would be susceptible to such a suggestion.

Quote
Is it possible he saw a kid who was shot and bleeding out

There wasn't much external bleeding. If there had been, controlling it would have been the first priority.

Quote
and just started trying to revive him as quick as possible without really thinking about what he was seeing,

Then I think he would have said he didn't remember seeing anything on the shirt, not claim to have seen something no one else saw, and that others did see was not there.

Ayala did the chest compressions. I think he would have noticed whether or not there was a large button on that part of the hoodie.

Quote
then later when gathering evidence,

I don't think Ayala participated in gathering evidence.

The reports say CST Smith collected the items on the ground, after she and Ciesla measured them. It seems Tara Malphurs (for some reason, 'Tara Clark' in Serino's report) collected the evidence on Martin's person. (184, (http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/357450/trayvon-martin-documents-ocr.pdf) pp. 20, 37, 38, 80, 137.)

Curiously, Ayala's own report doesn't say what he did after Sgt. McCoy took over the chest compressions (14/184). Serino said Ayala briefed him when he arrived about 8PM (37/184).

Quote
saw the button place on TM's chest

Why would someone put it on Martin's chest? Anyway, there is no reason Ayala would have been inspecting the body after McCoy relieved him on CPR.

Quote
I can't fathom a reason why the button wouldn't have been tested for blood and gunshot residue.

Do you have an explanation for why the cell phone wasn't tested for fingerprints?

Quote
We haven't seen a report on it, so is the report being held back (seems impossible given sunshine laws and other reports that have been released)

It's pleasant to imagine we have all the evidence, but we don't. For example, there are several videos that we know exist and haven't been released.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: leftwig on May 24, 2013, 07:58:07 AM
So in a scenario where I said the button was under his shirt, would you believe I meant it was on his pants or underneath the top layer of clothing?  And if I said the button was below his shirt?

I think Ayala saw the button on TM's sweatshirt at some point that evening.  I was thinking the misremembering might be when he saw it (say after TM was deceased and someone placed the button on top of the body knowing it was something special to him).  But yes, I do tend to agree that if there were no other evidence, I would believe Ayala's recollection was correct and that he saw the button on TM as he first approached him.  However, I can't fathom any reason why the button would not have been tested (and it appears it wasn't but if it was, then I'd change my opinion).  For me, the question is, which do I find more realistic, Ayala misremember exactly what he saw and when, or that a bunch of detectives and police failing to bag and test a piece of evidence that obviously should have been tested?

I didn't say the bleeding out was external.  Wasn't it Ayala that requested the plastic bag to stop the sucking chest wound? 

I think the cell phone should have been tested for GZ's DNA, however I don't think its close to as big a miss as the button would be.  The clothing, the gun, the holster and everything in close contact between the two individuals was tested for DNA, so why wouldn't a button right next to the bullet hole and likely containing DNA and gunshot residue not be bagged and tested? 

I don't think any of what I am stating is any soft of proof the button wasn't on TM's sweatshirt when Ayala got there and was in TM's pocket or on the ground.  I do think there is information that is missing or incomplete that begs one to question why.  I doubt the defense is putting much energy into it because its probably impossible to know where it really was and the only way the information would help them is if they could prove that the button were in TM's pocket.  I doubt the police or investigators are up to no good on this one, but it does not make them look good.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DiwataMan on May 24, 2013, 08:58:58 AM
What is the actual evidence of the button/headphones "in the pocket(s)" anyway? Is it just the entry regarding these, and other items found(lighter and Skittles), in the SPD report description under the Property Narrative("located and collected with in the victim's pockets")?

If that's it then that's really weak. Who entered that information into the report? The information on the evidence bag itself and considering CST Smith collected the stuff I would assume she wrote the description on the bag itself which she describes as "...in the victims pockets or in close proximity." It almost seems like whoever entered that info into the SPD report description left off the "or in close proximity" for whatever reason.

The problem here was lumping all these items in one bag. She should have retrieved one item at a time, described it and where it was found and bagged it.

Given the fact that "or in close proximity" is used here and there were no object markers for any of the items listed I would say a fair assumption is that "in close proximity" would mean on/attached to the body in some form.

But that still leaves us; who is to say from this which item(s) were "in the pockets" and which item(s) were "in close proximity"?

Lighter - This would seem odd and unlikely to characterize as on/attached to the body in some form.
Skittles - This would seem odd and unlikely to characterize as on/attached to the body in some form.
Button - This would NOT seem odd and NOT unlikely to characterize as on/attached to the body in some form.
Headphones - This would NOT seem odd and NOT unlikely to characterize as on/attached to the body in some form.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DebFrmHell on May 24, 2013, 09:31:59 AM
IMO ONLY, they took pictures of the body and items surrounding it.  Because those pictures are protected by law, we won't see them until the trial.  That is only time we will have definitive proof on the position of the items.

Another question.  Isn't "in close proximity" an edit or an add-on?  I don't remember reading that before.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DiwataMan on May 24, 2013, 09:39:30 AM
IMO ONLY, they took pictures of the body and items surrounding it.  Because those pictures are protected by law, we won't see them until the trial.  That is only time we will have definitive proof on the position of the items.

Another question.  Isn't "in close proximity" an edit or an add-on?  I don't remember reading that before.

Well, logic is good enough for me ;), I'm going with button and headphones not in pocket.

Evidence Bag with description:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gg072c6k5jii62t/1w-O_bfAHm/Defense%27s%20Documents/Reciprocal%202/defense_photos/DSC_0226.JPG

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gg072c6k5jii62t/5SE_vMu4f7
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: Cylinder on May 24, 2013, 10:00:50 AM
The best explanation I can come up with is that in the course of medical treatment and identification that these items were taken off or removed from pockets. For instance, I wouldn't do chest compressions with that big needle in the way and the risk of blood-borne pathogens. Once the wallet check proves fruitless, the police are going to go through every pocket for identifying information.

When the evidence is collected, it should be collected as it was found by the tech. It starts looking hinky when a police officer starts shoving evidence into pockets or says it was found in pockets when it was found on the ground. Any discrepancy can hopefully resolved by photographs and testimony.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: RickyJim on May 24, 2013, 10:13:34 AM
Do we know what pictures were taken of Martin's body, before, during or after CPR?  They might clear up the mystery but they certainly won't be publicly released.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: Cylinder on May 24, 2013, 10:32:50 AM
Do we know what pictures were taken of Martin's body, before, during or after CPR?  They might clear up the mystery but they certainly won't be publicly released.

After CPR, not counting any witness photographs. I'll have to look at the timing of the photographs in relation to the identity search.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: leftwig on May 24, 2013, 11:10:21 AM
I think the report is partially it.  I think the items not being logged as separate items or tested by forensics are the main reasons.  The phone obviously was not connected to the headphones any longer and it was not in TM's pockets or on his person, so it was bagged separately.  I would think the headphones if on the ground around the body would have been bagged separately from items found within TM's pockets. 

Again, I don't think the defense has focused that much on this issue as its not practical for them and not as important as other pieces of evidence.  Even if they could somehow prove that those items were collected from TM's pockets from detectives, the state would just say other police put them there after the fact and there isn't any way the defense wouldn't have anyway to disprove it.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DebFrmHell on May 24, 2013, 01:34:14 PM
I think the report is partially it.  I think the items not being logged as separate items or tested by forensics are the main reasons.  The phone obviously was not connected to the headphones any longer and it was not in TM's pockets or on his person, so it was bagged separately.  I would think the headphones if on the ground around the body would have been bagged separately from items found within TM's pockets. 

Again, I don't think the defense has focused that much on this issue as its not practical for them and not as important as other pieces of evidence.  Even if they could somehow prove that those items were collected from TM's pockets from detectives, the state would just say other police put them there after the fact and there isn't any way the defense wouldn't have anyway to disprove it.

I think those items are very important.  If it is true and can be proven, that the button, earbuds, and WMFJC were in his pocket it would be a clear signal for intent of Martin when he decided to either return or hide in wait around the "T."  Zimmerman walked past the "T" once going towards RVC without incident.  If the keys were the first to go, it would appear that he was on the west side of the "T" when Martin approached him and socked him in the nose.

That is just my opinion.  If I was a juror, it could be something I would value as evidence.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DiwataMan on May 24, 2013, 02:10:01 PM
I made a blog about this issue which I think, hope ;), covers just about everything.

http://diwataman.wordpress.com/my-posts-parent-page/george-zimmerman-case/george-zimmerman-case-evidence/the-button-the-headphones/
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 02:42:57 PM
Isn't "in close proximity" an edit or an add-on?

Probably the other way around. I think the bag would be labeled when the evidence was collected, and by the same person. So Malphurs would have written 'in close proximity', and CST Smith would have omitted it when she logged the evidence.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 02:44:44 PM
So in a scenario where I said the button was under his shirt, would you believe I meant it was on his pants or underneath the top layer of clothing?

You're making my point. The meaning depends on context.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 02:54:59 PM
Even if they could somehow prove that those items were collected from TM's pockets from detectives, the state would just say other police put them there

On their conduct to date, I don't think the prosecutors will be going after the SPD the way Johnnie Cochran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnnie_Cochran) went after the LAPD.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 03:05:20 PM
I didn't say the bleeding out was external. 

You said Ayala saw it.

Quote
Wasn't it Ayala that requested the plastic bag to stop the sucking chest wound?

Raimondo (16/184, (http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/357450/trayvon-martin-documents-ocr.pdf) 12/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)).

Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 03:38:37 PM
What is the actual evidence of the button/headphones "in the pocket(s)" anyway? Is it just the entry

The entry, and no known forensic testing. I don't recall any other arguments being presented on this point.

Quote
Who entered that information into the report?

Presumably CST Smith, since the items have a DMS tag number.

Quote
CST Smith collected the stuff

ME Investigator Tara Malphurs collected the items on Martin's person (35/284 (http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf)).

I have speculated that Smith may have been busy elsewhere, likely collecting the evidence on the ground, and didn't see where Malphurs collected each item from.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 24, 2013, 03:47:59 PM
The entry, and no known forensic testing. I don't recall any other arguments being presented on this point.

And the fact it seems completely contrary to logic and good evidence collection to remove the pin at the scene and place it in a bag with sundry other objects. A pin that was supposedly at most inches from the gunshot hole. Wouldn't the pin have cast a "shadow" on the hoodie gunshot residue pattern?
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 03:48:36 PM
If it is true and can be proven, that the button, earbuds, and WMFJC

What's WMFJC?
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 04:03:14 PM
And the fact it seems completely contrary to logic and good evidence collection to remove the pin at the scene and place it in a bag with sundry other objects.

Your opinion, not a 'fact'. And you may be right. I have no opinion either way.
 
Quote
Wouldn't the pin have cast a "shadow" on the hoodie gunshot residue pattern?

I don't see gunshot residue.



Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 04:29:40 PM
I made a blog about this issue which I think, hope ;), covers just about everything.

http://diwataman.wordpress.com/my-posts-parent-page/george-zimmerman-case/george-zimmerman-case-evidence/the-button-the-headphones/

Thanks for doing this.

The summary of Malphurs's SAO interview mentions the Skittles and the beverage can. She said she collected the candy, didn't remember seeing the can.

We've talked about how odd those memos are in the choice of what to memorialize. This has to be one of the strangest. It seems to reflect the Crump/Julison narrative, rather than any interest in probative evidence.

I hadn't noticed that CST Smith's name is on the bag. Malphurs probably bagged the items and handed Smith the bag without labeling it. Doesn't seem like good practice to me.

Even if W-13's photo was of better quality, the body was still face down when it was taken.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: DebFrmHell on May 24, 2013, 05:32:19 PM
What's WMFJC?
The Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail.  Too long to type.  Borrowed the acronym from John Galt.  :)
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 05:38:27 PM
The Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail. 

Thanks.

I don't think there is any dispute that the beverage can was in Martin's pocket.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: unitron on May 24, 2013, 06:17:01 PM
Thanks.

I don't think there is any dispute that the beverage can was in Martin's pocket.

But there's a lot of "how and when did it get separated from the 7-Eleven bag" yet to be answered.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 24, 2013, 06:17:55 PM
But there's a lot of "how and when did it get separated from the 7-Eleven bag" yet to be answered.

Probably never will be.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: MJW on May 24, 2013, 06:24:57 PM
Your opinion, not a 'fact'. And you may be right. I have no opinion either way.
 
I don't see gunshot residue.

I said "the fact it seems...." I wasn't claiming it as a fact that it was completely contrary to logic and good evidence collection, only that it seemed to be. Perhaps I should have said, "seems to me," but I assumed that was implicit. If you prefer: And because it seems to me to be completely contrary to logic and good evidence collection.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on June 25, 2013, 12:27:21 PM
Photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/9137677532/) of Martin's body, with a view of the photo button. (Warning: somewhat graphic.)

ETA: This photo has been displayed in court. I got it from the video feed. I assume it is acceptable to link such photos, and if not I'll soon find out.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on June 25, 2013, 01:08:10 PM
Larger version (http://www.flickr.com/photos/81587998@N06/9137976172/) of the photo linked in the last post. (Same Warning: somewhat graphic.)
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: IgnatiusJDonnelly on June 26, 2013, 08:15:53 AM
But there's a lot of "how and when did it get separated from the 7-Eleven bag" yet to be answered.

Unless TM used it to strike GZ, the location of the can isn't important. Ever buy anything at a gas station or convenience store? Those  bags they give you seem to be designed to cause items to fall out.
His pocket was more secure.
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: IgnatiusJDonnelly on June 26, 2013, 08:18:04 AM
Quote from: nomatter_nevermind on Today at 07:16:34 AM
She raised the window. She heard a very aggressive, angry, agitated voice. Then she heard a lighter, softer, higher-pitched voice. Couldn't understand words.


This jibes with what we heard early on.
Did she estimate how long the verbal exchange lasted?
Title: Re: The Button and the Headphones
Post by: unitron on June 26, 2013, 04:08:37 PM
Unless TM used it to strike GZ, the location of the can isn't important. Ever buy anything at a gas station or convenience store? Those  bags they give you seem to be designed to cause items to fall out.
His pocket was more secure.

It would seem that if he put the can in the hoodie pocket he wouldn't have taken it out of the bag first, but left it in the bag and put the bag holding the can in the pocket.  Extra insulation, reduces amount of condensation on the can, etc.

So I wonder if the authorities (cops, EMTs, etc) somehow caused or allowed the bag and the can to become separated somehow post-mortem, or if Trayvon himself separated them for I can't help but wonder what reason.

And yeah, I hate those bags.