# Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [April 18, 2012, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125 "2012-04-18T04:41:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 104
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2062 "2012-05-23T19:40:59Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Cite for this timeline? The scream on that call lasts longer than 30 secs, just by itself. The call IS the timeline. it’s consistent with Zimmerman’s account of what happened. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2063 "2012-05-23T19:47:57Z")
> [@camille](#): > > English , please? > > Also, did you ever comment on the hearing at length? I didn’t see it if you did. Did you think the prosecutor was unprepared and came off looking bad? Wasn’t there any way for him to object to Zimmerman’s apology, or do a better cross? It would have been an opportunity to have Zimmerman set out his story prior to discovery if he had been able to do it, no? I wasn’t impressed. Sorry about that. A witness can testify only to what he knows: what he saw, what he heard, what he smelled, what he touched. So a witness can testify, “Zimmerman said, ‘I was being choked.’” And he can also testify, “I observed Zimmerman’s neck closely, and saw no marks, scratches, or bruises on his neck.'” But the witness isn’t allowed to take the final step and say, “Therefore, Zimmerman was lying.” This is true because the jury (or the judge in a bench trial) is the fact-finder. The fact-finder, and only the fact-finder, can judge ultimate issues of fact. So the role of the witnesses is to say, “I saw (or heard, or read, or smelled) such-and-so.” The role of the lawyer is to _argue_ to the fact-finder that they should reach a conclusion based on that testimony. A witness cannot be asked things like, “Was the defendant lying?” That’s a question of fact for the jury to resolve. In the sample testimony, the witness would not be allowed to testify that there was contradictory evidence, but not go on to say what it was, since that amounts to saying, “Zimmerman said X, but the other evidence shows he’s lying.” The witness could say that other evidence contradicts Zimmerman’s statements, but then he has to say what that evidence is… and then the jury has to sort out which of the pieces of contradictory evidence they believe. That’s the sole responsibility – the sole province – of the jury. Yes, I thought the prosecutor stumbled badly. But his cross-examination was limited by the direct examination. What does this mean? A party that calls a witness can ask any questions that will elicit relevant information from that witness. This is called _direct examination._ The opposing side can then cross-examine the witness, but his cross-examination is generally limited to matters that came up in the direct examination. There’s a fair degree of wiggle room in this rule – the cross-examination can, for example, consist of impeachment questions, questions not brought up in the direct examination but designed to show why the witness should not be believed. If the party that called the witness then wishes to further explore or clarify matters that arose during the cross-examination, he may “re-direct” the witness, asking questions that explore issues from the cross-examination. And, in turn, the opposing side my yet further clarify in a “re-cross.” The field gets smaller and smaller, as you can imagine, with each back and forth. In the bail hearing, O’Mara was careful to keep his direct examination to issues relating to bail, and not to the substantive aspects of the accusation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2064 "2012-05-23T19:51:49Z")
> [@Larry\_Mudd](#): > > Look, ten-day suspensions for traces of weed and writing “WTF” on a locker door are not good indications of a predisposition to commit violent assault - particularly in the context of being a house-guest very close to his hosts’ doors. Good indicators, bad indicators, or indifferent indicators – one thing they are NOT is likely _admissible_ indicators. The defense cannot raise the spectre of a drug-addled Martin based on locker graffiti and trace THC residue. > [@](#): > > Zimmerman’s narrative (at least as far as we have received it) is not, and there is no _direct_ evidence that Martin launched into an unprovoked assault. Yes, there is. Zimmerman’s testimony of Martin’s unprovoked assault is direct evidence. > [@](#): > > The only _evidence_ we have that Zimmerman was assaulted by Martin is his own statement to that effect, and this is _outright contradicted_ by actual evidence in some ways (such as Trayvon threatening him in his truck) and seems dubious when considered in light of other facts in evidence (such as the fact that he was engaged in a phone call when he is alleged to have sought Zimmerman out and started a fight with him.) OK, let’s nail this down. What, specifically, is the outright contradiction you see here? ---
**Author:** ![enomaj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/59ef9b/32.png) [@enomaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enomaj)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2065 "2012-05-23T19:54:23Z")
**Magiver** , when you were challenged, what were you doing? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2066 "2012-05-23T19:57:55Z")
> [@enomaj](#): > > **Magiver** , when you were challenged, what were you doing? walking with a flashlight pointing down on the sidewalk to see where I was going. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2067 "2012-05-23T20:00:03Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Zimmerman was the one who called the police. Giving him all the balls he needed to apprehend the perp – he knew he had back up on the way. ---
**Author:** ![enomaj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/59ef9b/32.png) [@enomaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enomaj)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2068 "2012-05-23T20:02:01Z")
I can see how that might make somebody suspicious but Zimmerman had even less to go on than that. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2069 "2012-05-23T20:03:11Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The call IS the timeline. it’s consistent with Zimmerman’s account of what happened. The scream was picked up by a neighbor’s phone who was reporting the conflict to 911. Common sense should tell you the start of the fight began before this call was made, not simultaneous to it. There would need to be sufficient time for the neighbor to hear noises in his/her backyard, go to the window to see what was happening, put 2 and 2 together that a fight was going on, retrieve their phone, dial 911, and get through to the dispatcher. And if you can’t see this, then I probably should stop discussing this with you. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2070 "2012-05-23T20:13:20Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > To a troubled black kid who bills himself as NO\_LIMIT\_NIGGA I would expect a challenge to his presence in the neighborhood to be inflammatory. I don’t suppose it would matter much to you if the lyrics to the song that inspired him so are mainly about eschewing violence in favour of smoking pot. (Apart from the usual ‘My rhymes are better than your rhymes’ content.) > [@](#): > > I’ve been challenged 2 houses away from my own house and was insulted but as a homeowner I understood the question was ultimately for my benefit. Martin probably wouldn’t have seen it that way. This character judgement is based on..? > [@](#): > > Zimmerman was the one who called the police. I really don’t see him assaulting Martin knowing this. I don’t see him cold-cocking Martin, either - but laying his hands on him to hold him in place until the police arrived is consistent with his character and motivation. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2071 "2012-05-23T20:19:40Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > If Zimmerman is innocent, what has he got to hide? Sounds like you think he has something to worry about. You don’t understand. The **prosecution** won’t release his statements. It is possible that O’Mara might release them. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2072 "2012-05-23T20:24:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What, specifically, is the outright contradiction you see here? The one noted by prosecution. In the call to dispatch, Zimmerman describes Martin walking past his truck, then breaking into a run, and Zimmerman then follows him until he’s advised not to. In his later statements, he reportedly asserted that Martin circled his truck, peering in, prompting him to roll up the window. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2073 "2012-05-23T20:24:52Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > You don’t understand. The **prosecution** won’t release his statements. It is possible that O’Mara might release them. I was speaking about the supposed attorney/client privilige of text messages. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2074 "2012-05-23T20:29:58Z")
> [@Larry\_Mudd](#): > > The one noted by prosecution. In the call to dispatch, Zimmerman describes Martin walking past his truck, then breaking into a run, and Zimmerman then follows him until he’s advised not to. > > In his later statements, he reportedly asserted that Martin circled his truck, peering in, prompting him to roll up the window. There have been a number of sources that have said a variety of things about Zimmerman’s statements. What exactly was his second statement? What’s the source, and what did the source say? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2075 "2012-05-23T20:31:02Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I was speaking about the supposed attorney/client privilige of text messages. If Zimmerman was texting his attorney, I’d say they would fall under the privilege. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2076 "2012-05-23T20:32:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If Zimmerman was texting his attorney, I’d say they would fall under the privilege. So would I. The reference was to any and all text messages, including those where he might be boasting to friends. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2077 "2012-05-23T20:36:39Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > You don’t understand. The **prosecution** won’t release his statements. It is possible that O’Mara might release them. The defense has had months now to leak his statement, but it hasn’t. That’s an indicator that they don’t want it leaked. Which is more likely: that Zimmerman’s statement damages the prosecution’s case? Or damages his own? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2078 "2012-05-23T20:37:01Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > So would I. The reference was to any and all text messages, including those where he might be boasting to friends. Oh, no. Not only would those NOT be privileged, but they’d be admissions against penal interest, and admissible even though hearsay. Truth is, I think that’s what the prosecution has up its sleeve. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2079 "2012-05-23T20:39:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Oh, no. Not only would those NOT be privileged, but they’d be admissions against penal interest, and admissible even though hearsay. > > Truth is, I think that’s what the prosecution has up its sleeve. I am also very interested in the EMT report, and how it squares with the report from Zimmerman’s personal physician. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2080 "2012-05-23T20:39:30Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The defense has had months now to leak his statement, but it hasn’t. That’s an indicator that they don’t want it leaked. > > Which is more likely: that Zimmerman’s statement damages the prosecution’s case? Or damages his own? Or is not particularly dispositive either way. As long as we’re being complete. I am reasonably certain that there’s SOMETHING we don’t yet know about that is relatively damaging to Zimmerman’s case. It could be the statement; I said at the very beginning that it was key to examine it before reaching any conclusions and I still believe that. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/2081 "2012-05-23T20:40:36Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I am also very interested in the EMT report, and how it squares with the report from Zimmerman’s personal physician. Yup. That’s another potential bombshell for the defense. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=103) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=105)