# 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:** 176
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3502 "2012-07-12T15:02:55Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > But why wasn’t any of Zimmermans blood found anywhere on Martin? If he was trying to smash his head into the ground and smother Zimmerman with his hands while his face was 45% covered in blood, how did he manage to not get a single drop of Zimmerman’s blood on his hands? And if Zimmerman’s blood was all over his jacket and Martin was straddling/smothering/beating him continuously, how did not one drop of that blood transfer from Zimmerman’s jacket to Martin’s clothing? The savage and sustained beating narrative just simply does not fit the evidence, so I don’t know why you guys are treating it like established fact at this point. Its every bit the speculative narrative fitting without evidence that you constantly accuse the other side of IMO. If any of Zimmerman’s blood had been on Martin, it would probably be on Martin’s hands. They clipped Martin’s fingernails and tested them, but they didn’t take swabs from Martin’s hands, so we don’t know if there was any of Zimmerman’s blood on his hands. They did find some of Zimmerman’s blood on Martin’s clothing. Why don’t you actually read the evidence instead of speculating from false premises? ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3503 "2012-07-12T15:15:10Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > If any of Zimmerman’s blood had been on Martin, it would probably be on Martin’s hands. They clipped Martin’s fingernails and tested them, but they didn’t take swabs from Martin’s hands, so we don’t know if there was any of Zimmerman’s blood on his hands. > > They did find some of Zimmerman’s blood on Martin’s clothing. Why don’t you actually read the evidence instead of speculating from false premises? Why don’t you answer questions without being condescending? I had never heard anything about Zimmerman’s blood being on Martin’s clothing to this point. How much was there? An amount consistent with a savage, brutal, sustained beating and attempted asphyxiation? Or a couple of drops? ---
**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:** [July 12, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3504 "2012-07-12T15:15:24Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > They did find some of Zimmerman’s blood on Martin’s clothing. Why don’t you actually read the evidence instead of speculating from false premises? The only unadulterated drop of Zimmerman’s blood found on Martin’s clothing was found on the shirt _under_ his hoodie. Funny, that. There was one drop mixed with his own and ZImmerman, I believe. All the rest of the blood found on him was his own. Dawning on you yet that you’ve probably been defending a murderer for the last few months? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3505 "2012-07-12T15:37:10Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Why don’t you answer questions without being condescending? > > I had never heard anything about Zimmerman’s blood being on Martin’s clothing to this point. How much was there? An amount consistent with a savage, brutal, sustained beating and attempted asphyxiation? Or a couple of drops? One of the drops was Zimmerman’s and some were mixed and there were some that were inconclusive. Since the fight took about a minute and Martin was on top I’m not surprised that little of Zimmerman’s blood ended up on Martin’s clothing. That is consistent with Martin being on top as Witness #6. I’m being condescending, because the post you responded too has a pdf that breaks it down blood stain by blood stain. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3506 "2012-07-12T15:39:47Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > I’m being condescending, because the post you responded too has a pdf that breaks it down blood stain by blood stain. Oh ok, so as long as you have an excuse for being condescending that makes it ok to be condescending. Got it. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Poochey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@Poochey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Poochey)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3507 "2012-07-12T15:46:14Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > Oh, you. > He got his inflammation from the assault. He didn’t have it before hand. > > [http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/zimmerman\_bond\_hearing\_exhibits/george\_zimmerman\_medical\_report.pdf](http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/zimmerman_bond_hearing_exhibits/george_zimmerman_medical_report.pdf) As the other poster who has it can tell you, sacroillitis is a form of arthritis, which can’t be gotten immediately. From the doctor’s report, it appears Zimmerman also sprained his back. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3508 "2012-07-12T15:46:17Z")
[QUOTE=you with the face;15264575 Dawning on you yet that you’ve probably been defending a murderer for the last few months?[/QUOTE] No what is dawning on me is that the sane pro-martin people have moved on when they realized the evidence was against them. What is left is people that argue that Zimmerman is a cold blooded murder and can’t be bothered to let their delusions be diluted by actual evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3509 "2012-07-12T15:49:20Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > One of the drops was Zimmerman’s and some were mixed and there were some that were inconclusive. Since the fight took about a minute and Martin was on top I’m not surprised that little of Zimmerman’s blood ended up on Martin’s clothing. That is consistent with Martin being on top as Witness #6. > > I’m being condescending, because the post you responded too has a pdf that breaks it down blood stain by blood stain. Also, here is what I’m seeing in that PDF: “Very little blood of GZ conclusively found on Trayvon Martin” and nothing listed in the chart as conclusive for Zimmerman’s blood on Martin’s clothing. Nothing. Now I’m wondering whether you actually read the PDF or not. So, that is consistent with a brutal, savage and sustained beating/suffocation? You really think this is obvious? My questions still stand. Just replace none with no conclusive blood found, and tell me how you can straddle someone beating them brutally for a sustained period of time when ~45% of his face is covered in blood and Zimmerman’s jacket has blood all over it, but nothing conclusive ends up on Martin’s clothing? Do you really see no problem with this? Really? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3510 "2012-07-12T16:18:49Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > You really think this is obvious? My questions still stand. Just replace none with no conclusive blood found, and tell me how you can straddle someone beating them brutally for a sustained period of time when ~45% of his face is covered in blood and Zimmerman’s jacket has blood all over it, but nothing conclusive ends up on Martin’s clothing? Do you really see no problem with this? Really? Replace ‘sustained period of time’ with ‘one minute’. Keep in mind that we actually heard most of the beating on the 911 recording, so most of the bleeding happened after Martin was dead. The blood on Martin’s jacket would be when he sat up and the blood started dripping on his jacket. Until Zimmerman had a chance to sit up the blood would have ended up on the walk way or the grass. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3511 "2012-07-12T16:28:38Z")
[http://www.scribd.com/doc/99916379/Documents-Given-to-the-Defendant-R-1#download](http://www.scribd.com/doc/99916379/Documents-Given-to-the-Defendant-R-1#download) There is supposed to be a lot audio files and photos also. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3512 "2012-07-12T16:42:50Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > Replace ‘sustained period of time’ with ‘one minute’. Keep in mind that we actually heard most of the beating on the 911 recording, so most of the bleeding happened after Martin was dead. The blood on Martin’s jacket would be when he sat up and the blood started dripping on his jacket. \*\*Until Zimmerman had a chance to sit up \*\*the blood would have ended up on the walk way or the grass. Ah, but Zimmerman did sit up right away - immediately, in fact - and got on top of Martin, straddling the dead body while frisking him. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3513 "2012-07-12T16:53:51Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Ah, but Zimmerman did sit up right away - immediately, in fact - and got on top of Martin, straddling the dead body while frisking him. I think that is where the one drop of Zimmerman’s blood on Martin’s clothes came from. ---
**Author:** ![BottledBlondJeanie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/0ea827/32.png) [@BottledBlondJeanie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BottledBlondJeanie)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3514 "2012-07-12T16:58:26Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > If the state proved she murdered her husband, then it doesn’t matter if she was afraid of being killed by her husband. It could very well be she was afraid (if she botched up killing him, then her husband might very well kill her…not unreasonable at all to be afraid of that), but who the fuck cares? The state only needs to show that she killed her husband for unlawful reasons, in an unlawful fashion. > > Why focus on fear anyway? This is why I think you’re spewing bullshit. If the State can prove the accused was the aggressor, regardless of whether or not they feared imminent harm, they forfeit the claim of self defense if they had the ability to withdraw and did not. If they brandished a gun, again no self defense. There is no need to prove anything specific about the accused’s emotional state just to disprove self defense. > > You’re the only lawyer I see saying this, though. I’ve seen not one commentary on the Zimmerman case that says the prosecution is obligated to do anything except disprove self defense by proving 2nd degree murder. He’s probably the only lawyer saying this since many of us stopped venturing into this thread regularly. I think you might be so involved with this that you’re not following direct case citations proving the issue or it’s just a disparity between lawyer and non-lawyer arguments. You can just Google and find some summaries that might be more to your tastes like this [The Burden of Proof in Criminal Trials](http://criminal.lawyers.com/Criminal-Law-Basics/Criminal-Trials-Who-Has-the-Burden-of-Proof.html) Yes, the defense has to raise the affirmative defense of self defense and show some basis for it (apparently some states don’t require it be proven by even a preponderance of the evidence) and then the prosecution must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. If I had a chance and thought it would help, I’d show you some model jury instructions. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3515 "2012-07-12T17:12:19Z")
Here’s a link that summarizes this case, with citations to case law: > **[George Zimmerman : Witness Support and Legal Recap - TalkLeft: The Politics...](http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/6/24/122557/873/crimenews/George-Zimmerman-Witness-Support-and-Legal-Recap)** > > Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news. > [@](#): > > To get a jury instruction on self defense, all Zimmerman must produce is some evidence, no matter how flimsy, even if it’s just his own version of events. > . > . > . > Once George Zimmerman introduces some evidence of self-defense and is entitled to a jury instruction, he has no other burden of proof. The state must disprove self-defense by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I’m sorry **you with the face** has trouble grasping this, and I’ve tried to make room for the possibility that this is, as **Jeanie** suggests, just because it’s something obvious to lawyers but very contradictory to non-lawyers. But whatever the barrier to understanding is, the bottom line is, as a matter of established and crystal clear case law, when Zimmerman claims self-defense, the state must disprove the elements of self-defense, which include disproving he was afraid or proving that his fear of death or serious bodily injury was not reasonable. That’s not a matter of opinion, that’s not up for a vote, that’s the law of the State of Florida. ---
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3516 "2012-07-12T17:37:37Z")
> [@](#): > > Among the documents is a note from the prosecutor who said one of the witnesses said her son, a minor, had felt pressured by investigators to say the injured man he saw was wearing a red top. The boy’s testimony had been considered key, because it backed up Zimmerman’s allegation that he — wearing red — was being pummeled. [http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/12/2892510/more-evidence-released-in-zimmerman.html](http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/12/2892510/more-evidence-released-in-zimmerman.html) This, combined with the police correcting and coaching witness testimony as to who was screaming for help, is further evidence of not just simple incompetence on the part of SPD, but active bias and misconduct. It’s no wonder why witnesses have since retracted and corrected parts of their original statements. ---
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3517 "2012-07-12T18:45:03Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > No what is dawning on me is that the sane pro-martin people have moved on when they realized the evidence was against them. What is left is people that argue that Zimmerman is a cold blooded murder and can’t be bothered to let their delusions be diluted by actual evidence. Not only is that bullshit, and you know it, but the assertion that Zimmerman is a cold blooded murderer (which I’ve openly disagreed with) is not even as ridiculous and delusional than what you assert as the actions and motivations of Martin. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3518 "2012-07-12T19:01:35Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > [http://www.scribd.com/doc/99916379/Documents-Given-to-the-Defendant-R-1#download](http://www.scribd.com/doc/99916379/Documents-Given-to-the-Defendant-R-1#download) > > There is supposed to be a lot audio files and photos also. Looked through it. Nothing new, really. Certainly nothing explosive. So, **Bricker** , the possibilities of that evidence that Corey has and we haven’t seen are narrowing more and more. We can pretty much eliminate any witness statement as being that evidence. In fact, the only thing left are Zimmerman’s text messages. So - what do you think a text message could possibly say to justify murder 2 charge, much less conviction? ---
**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:** [July 12, 2012, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3519 "2012-07-12T19:34:22Z")
> [@BottledBlondJeanie](#): > > Yes, the defense has to raise the affirmative defense of self defense and show some basis for it (apparently some states don’t require it be proven by even a preponderance of the evidence) and then the prosecution must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. My position _isn’t_ that the State doesn’t have to disprove self-defense. My position is that the State can disprove self-defense without demonstrating anything about the accused’s beliefs, like **Bricker** has insisted. The prosecution could show that the accused forfeited their claim to self-defense by initiating the conflict or failing to retreat. To prove 2nd degree murder, the State is going to have to prove Zimmerman did these two things. In his case, evidence for murder automatically destroys his self-defense claim. They can not co-exist with each other. If what I’m saying is wrong, it would be nice to see Florida’s jury instructions. Here are [Connecticut’s](http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/Part2/2.8-1.htm). An excerpt: > [@](#): > > The state’s burden5 > > You must remember that the defendant has no burden of proof whatsoever with respect to the defense of (self-defense / the defense of others). Instead, it is the state that must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in (self-defense / the defense of others) if it is to prevail on its charge[s] of \[, or of any of the lesser-included offenses on which you have been instructed]. To meet this burden, the state need not disprove all four of the elements of (self-defense / the defense of others). Instead, it can defeat the defense of (self-defense / the defense of others) by disproving any one of the four elements of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt to your unanimous satisfaction. You must find that the defendant did not act in (self-defense / defense of others), if you find any of the following: > > 1. > > ``` > The state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that, when the defendant used physical force, (he/she) did not actually believe that <insert name of other person> was using or about to use physical force against (him/her/<insert name of third person>). If you have found that the force used by the defendant was deadly physical force, then the state must prove that the defendant did not actually believe that the other person 1) was using or about to use deadly physical force against (him/her/a third person), or 2) was inflicting or about to inflict great bodily harm upon (him/her/a third person). > > OR > > ``` > > 2. > > ``` > The state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's actual belief concerning the degree of force being, or about to be, used against (him/her) was unreasonable, in the sense that a reasonable person, viewing all the circumstances from the defendant's point of view, would not have shared that belief. > > OR > > ``` > > 3. > > ``` > The state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that, when the defendant used physical force to defend (himself/herself/<insert name of third person>) against <insert name of other person>, (he/she) did not actually believe that the degree of force (he/she) used was necessary for that purpose. Here again, as with the first requirement, an actual belief is an honest, sincere belief. > > OR > > ``` > > 4. > > ``` > The state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that, if the defendant did actually believe that the degree of force (he/she) used to defend (himself/herself/<insert name of third person>) against <insert name of other person> was necessary for that purpose, that belief was unreasonable, in the sense that a reasonable person, viewing all the circumstances from the defendant's point of view, would not have shared that belief. > > ``` > > [\ > > \*\*You must also find that the defendant did not act in (self-defense / defense of others), if you find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that \*\*\ > > Provocation: the defendant provoked \ into using physical force against (him/her). > > Initial aggressor: the defendant was the initial aggressor in the encounter. > > Combat by agreement: the physical encounter between the defendant and \ was a combat by agreement. > > Duty to retreat: the defendant had a duty to retreat from the physical encounter because (he/she) knew (he/she) could do so with complete safety. > > Surrender property: the defendant knew that (he/she) would not need to use physical force against \ if (he/she) surrendered property to \. > > Comply with demand: the defendant knew that (he/she) would not need to use physical force against \ if (he/she) complied with the demand to \.] > > Conclusion > If you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the elements of a crime to which (self-defense/defense of others) applies, you shall then find the defendant not guilty and not consider the defense. (bolding mine) ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3520 "2012-07-12T19:36:12Z")
It makes it pretty clear that George’s hands were definitely free the whole time. How can he be in a fight with someone he outweighs by 40-50lbs with his hands completely free, afraid for his life…yet Martin doesn’t have a mark on him other than the gunshot wound? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/3521 "2012-07-12T19:52:07Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The prosecution could show that the accused forfeited their claim to self-defense by initiating the conflict or failing to retreat. Can you show me Florida law that supports this? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=175) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=177)