# 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:** 219
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4362 "2012-07-22T15:18:20Z")
> [@enomaj](#): > > I don’t know who screamed but that last scream, the one that gets cut off by the gunshot, I’m going with the person with two collapsed lungs. It’s hard to tell, IMO, though someone might conclude the last scream was by a different person, but then I’ve never been shot. ---
**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 22, 2012, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4363 "2012-07-22T15:56:05Z")
> [@emeraldia](#): > > Aha! But that’s where you’re mistaken. > 715:23 - Approximate time call with Zimmerman ends > 716:43 - 911 call placed by (blacked out name) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help As has been repeatedly stated, the timeline you’re using is wrong. This is not indispute at this point, so it takes an act of willful ignorance for you to insist otherwise. > [@](#): > > OK, notwithstanding the fact that I can’t see Zimmerman drawing his gun and charging towards Trayvon, I have a bigger problem. You’re telling me that Zimmerman charges over to Trayvon with his gun drawn and Trayvon asks, “What are you following me for?” Would he not be asking, “What in the fuck are you doing with a **GUN** pointed at me?!” It was dark, the gun was dark and small, and his eyes would have been drawn to the outline of Zimmerman’s bulky figure running towards him moreso than any object in his hand. The reason why I think he pulled his gun out at the T is because Zimmerman himself gives us that clue in his statement. His fixation on stressing how he reached for his cellphone right before the fight started is a hint that he did indeed reach for something. Between a gun and cellphone, it seems infinitely more likely that he would have reached for a weapon to protect himself. Not a phone. What was calling the cops going to do at that point? If he truly wanted to direct to the cops to his location, he would have run to the safety of this truck and then called them. Not stood there like a gaping idiot, yapping to the cops right in front of his supposed attacker. > [@](#): > > When you say wrestling, don’t you mean fighting over control of the gun? Because that would have to be Martin and Zimmerman’s _only_ real concern at that point, right? No. I think Zimmerman was trying to physically detain Martin by holding him until the cops came. It’s possible they were wrestling for the gun, but I doubt it. None of Martin’s DNA or fingerprints were found on the gun. > [@](#): > > Why doesn’t Trayvon say to W6/John “No! Don’t help him! Help ME! This guy’s got a gun!”? And why didn’t W6 say he saw something shiny or that they looked like they were struggling over something. Also, this struggle for the gun has been going on for how long exactly at this point? 45 seconds? A minute? And nobody has gained full control over the gun in order to fire it? It was dark, the gun was dark and small, and John could barely see what was going on. Martin might have said help but John attributed it to the guy in the bottom. It’s also possible that Martin still didn’t see the gun. > [@](#): > > Zimmerman has a gun and Martin just decides to “stop fighting”? To just say, “Ah hell, he can have his stupid gun.” What do you mean he stops fighting? And why did he decide to start screaming then- and not when Zimmerman initially charged towards him gun blazing or especially when W6 came out? Yeah, the kid stopped fighting. If Zimmerman was holding him at gun point, it makes perfect sense that he would freeze. Martin knew he couldn’t outrun a bullet. He was screaming throughout the fight, because witnesses heard the voice for a while before the gun went off. > [@](#): > > OK, so it was a long struggle over **a gun** that **nobody saw** , and that **didn’t have Martin’s fingerprints or DNA on** , and no noticeable **injuries** to Zimmerman’s wrists or hands but blood covering 45% of his head are **not consistent with a struggle for a gun**. I never said anything about them fighting over the gun, so this paragraph is a big of wasted text, ain’t it? > [@](#): > > The sprinkler head causing two lacerations doesn’t seem as likely as the concerete since witness 6 mentioned the struggle moving near the sidewalk and he even said something about how much it hurts to have your head hit on the concrete. If Zimmerman’s head had been pummeled into concrete several times, explain to me how there is no blood smear on the back of his head? And why was none of his blood found under Martin’s fingernails? The guy had no hair and it was wet out; Martin would he have needed to dig into it with his nails to get a firm grasp on his head. Why were there no bruises on Z’s head where Martin’s fingers put pressure on his head and face? Also explain to me how he only got two discrete nicks to the back of the head and no diffuse pattern of contusions or abrasions. And if he really told W6 how much it hurts to have your head hit concrete, \* in the middle of the fucking fight \*, that sounds awfully like Zimmerman was a calm, chatty cathy. Too much presence of mind to claim self defense. > [@](#): > > Also **W6 doesn’t describe a struggle over a gun**.. he describes either an MMA style “ground and pound” attack or Trayvon holding Zimmerman down. There is virtually no evidence that Zimmerman had his gun drawn or that there was a struggle for a gun. More wasted text about fighting over a gun when this is _your_ conclusion, not mine…sigh. > [@](#): > > I haven’t even addressed how out of character _murder_ is for Zimmerman. But murder is somehow in character for Martin? You have no problem believing that the kid was trying to kill Z, and the kid had no rap sheet, and no history of violence. But for some reason, because apparently Zimmerman hadn’t murdered else before, you give Z the “murder is out of character for him” edit. There is not enough LOLs for this. > [@](#): > > In your account, you establish “ill will” or the “reckless disregard for life” by suggesting that Martin “stopped fighting” in the middle and just stood there screaming for help. Then Zimmerman executed him. But that makes no sense for Martin (or Zimmerman) to do such a thing. A guy in Colorado just shot up a theater full of people, killing a dozen of them as though they were nothing, and you’re talking to to me about _stuff making sense?_ What the fuck are you smoking? ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4364 "2012-07-22T16:35:59Z")
> [@](#): > > The reason why I think he pulled his gun out at the T is because Zimmerman himself gives us that clue in his statement. His fixation on stressing how he reached for his cellphone right before the fight started is a hint that he did indeed reach for something. Between a gun and cellphone, it seems infinitely more likely that he would have reached for a weapon to protect himself. Not a phone. What was calling the cops going to do at that point? If he truly wanted to direct to the cops to his location, he would have run to the safety of this truck and then called them. Not stood there like a gaping idiot, yapping to the cops right in front of his supposed attacker. I don’t know if Z pulled his gun out at the T…but I can’t stress enough how RIDICULOUS it is for George to claim that, as the suspicious looking, probably drugged up, probably armed, black kid in a hoodie, came out of the darkness from behind him asking if he had a problem, George’s first instinct was to back up and reach for his PHONE. To dial 911. It defies all logic and common sense. Who the FUCK dials 911 with the SCARY GUY RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU? Did George think Martin would quietly stand there, waiting for George to finish his phone call before picking up the conversation? It’s an insult to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, and I find it quite telling that only the adamant GZ supporters seem to not have any trouble with it. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4365 "2012-07-22T16:45:56Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I don’t know if Z pulled his gun out at the T…but I can’t stress enough how RIDICULOUS it is for George to claim that, as the suspicious looking, probably drugged up, probably armed, black kid in a hoodie, came out of the darkness from behind him asking if he had a problem, George’s first instinct was to back up and reach for his PHONE. To dial 911. > > It defies all logic and common sense. Who the FUCK dials 911 with the SCARY GUY RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU? Did George think Martin would quietly stand there, waiting for George to finish his phone call before picking up the conversation? > > It’s an insult to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, and I find it quite telling that only the adamant GZ supporters seem to not have any trouble with it. Why not? If 911 is predialed, it just takes an instant to phone. Just press the button. You don’t even have to talk, the phone number, and thus caller, would be instantly available to the dispatchers. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4366 "2012-07-22T17:23:52Z")
> [@hmarvin](#): > > Why not? If 911 is predialed, it just takes an instant to phone. Just press the button. You don’t even have to talk, the phone number, and thus caller, would be instantly available to the dispatchers. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4367 "2012-07-22T17:25:59Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > . You now are arguing that the actual evidence that the prosecution entered is wrong. Good luck with that. You kept arguing that the \*\*start \*\* of the call of the call was wrong, even thou is was irrelevant to time from the **end** of the call and the first 911 call. ---
**Author:** ![emeraldia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c2a13f/32.png) [@emeraldia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emeraldia)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4368 "2012-07-22T17:30:38Z")
[quote=“you\_with\_the\_face, post:4363, topic:619125”] It was dark, the gun was dark and small, and his eyes would have been drawn to the outline of Zimmerman’s bulky figure running towards him moreso than any object in his hand. > [@](#): > > It’s possible they were wrestling for the gun, but I doubt it. None of Martin’s DNA or fingerprints were found on the gun. So Zimmerman had his gun drawn, but you doubt that it played a particularly important role in their struggle? I see. > [@](#): > > It was dark, the gun was dark and small, and John could barely see what was going on. Martin might have said help but John attributed it to the guy in the bottom. It’s also possible that Martin still didn’t see the gun. I see.. so Zimmerman was hiding the gun behind his back throughout the encounter and wrestling one-handed. > [@](#): > > Yeah, the kid stopped fighting. If Zimmerman was holding him at gun point, it makes perfect sense that he would freeze. Martin knew he couldn’t outrun a bullet. Zimmerman holding him at gunpoint? If he were holding him at gunpoint he surely would have seen the gun, right? So Zimmerman hid the gun from Trayvon for some time, waited until he was good and bloody and _then_ pointed it at him? If he wanted to murder him why didn’t he point it at him sooner? > [@](#): > > I never said anything about them fighting over the gun, so this paragraph is a big of wasted text, ain’t it? The idea that they wouldn’t be fighting over the gun is absurd. > [@](#): > > And if he really told W6 how much it hurts to have your head hit concrete, \* in the middle of the fucking fight \*, that sounds awfully like Zimmerman was a calm, chatty cathy. Too much presence of mind to claim self defense. No, W6 said that to the investigator. > [@](#): > > A guy in Colorado just shot up a theater full of people, killing a dozen of them as though they were nothing, and you’re talking to to me about _stuff making sense?_ A guy shoots up a theater in Colorado and now your theory doesn’t need to make sense? And it makes perfect sense why he shot up a theater in Colorado. He was crazy. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4369 "2012-07-22T17:37:38Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > It defies all logic and common sense. Who the FUCK dials 911 with the SCARY GUY RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU? Did George think Martin would quietly stand there, waiting for George to finish his phone call before picking up the conversation? > > It’s an insult to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, and I find it quite telling that only the adamant GZ supporters seem to not have any trouble with it. So you are stating that Zimmerman had a\*\* reasonable fear\*\* of Martin even before Martin hit him? You are actually agreeing with Zimmerman’s case. ---
**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:** [July 22, 2012, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4370 "2012-07-22T17:40:20Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > So you are stating that Zimmerman had a\*\* reasonable fear\*\* of Martin even before Martin hit him? You are actually agreeing with Zimmerman’s case. Only if it went down the way Zimmerman claims. Nobody’s admitting Martin doubled back to ambush Zimmerman. But if Zimmerman is claiming that, it is unreasonable to conclude he would draw his phone before his weapon. ---
**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 22, 2012, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4371 "2012-07-22T18:07:11Z")
The cellphone element of his story screams a preemptive move to deflect any accusation of wrong doing. What should be an afterthought, an aside, a detail so minuscule that it could just as easily be omitted, is given as much if not more emphasis in his account as the most violent parts. That, plus the absurdity, is what makes me see it as a clue that he brandished his weapon. The getting out his car to find a street sign is a similar hotspot of absurdity that signals he’s trying hide wrong doing. Another hotspot is Martin supposedly threatening his life. What makes this detail most interesting and absurd is that, in his written statement, Zimmerman attributes this threat to the reason for him shooting the kid. It was not the head pounding or the smothering, but rather the words that supposedly came out of Martin’s mouth. People who have been following this thread since the beginning should know why I find this interesting. I do think the words coming out Msrtin’s mouth drove Z to pull the trigger. Those words were “help” and “stop” screamed so loudly everybody on the block could hear. Zimmerman wanted the kid to “shut the fuck up”. That’s a phrase he attributed to Martin, but it sounds like a textbook case of projection to me. I’m fully aware this sounds like me playing a psychologist, and I don’t care if it causes eye rolls. If you listen to Zimmerman with a discerning ear, you’ll hear him give away the basics of what really happened. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4372 "2012-07-22T18:47:45Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Only if it went down the way Zimmerman claims. Nobody’s admitting Martin doubled back to ambush Zimmerman. But if Zimmerman is claiming that, it is unreasonable to conclude he would draw his phone before his weapon. The trouble is that what Zimmerman said is irrelevant. Martin was at or near the top of the T and it doesn’t matter how he got there. The physical evidence and the witness testimony agree on that. I don’t think Martin doubled back. I think he stopped running/skipping/jogging when he rounded the corner and then Deedee called and he stepped onto one of the porches to get out of the rain. Deedee said he was ‘low talking’. He was probably whispering so the people in the townhome wouldn’t hear him. ---
**Author:** ![emeraldia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c2a13f/32.png) [@emeraldia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emeraldia)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4373 "2012-07-22T18:54:20Z")
Now that everybody is in universal agreement that there is insufficient evidence Zimmerman committed 2nd degree murder (based on the current evidence), let’s talk about manslaughter. [http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/782.07:](http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/782.07:) 782.07 … (1)  **The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, _without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776_ and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter** , a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Chapter 776 [http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/776.012](http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/776.012) 776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—… **a person is justified in the use of deadly force** and does not have a duty to retreat\*\* if\*\*: (1)\*\* He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself\*\* or herself or another **or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony** ; or (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013. History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27. [http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/776.041](http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/776.041) 776.041 Use of force by aggressor.— **The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who** : (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or (2)  **Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:** (a)  **Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and** that\*\* he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape **such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant;** or\*\* (b) In good faith, **the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force** , but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force. History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102. ---- Investigator Serino says that Zimmerman should be charged with manslaughter because he left his car and didn’t identify himself, seeming to indicate the “culpable negligence” aspect of it. Serino seems to be arguing that Zimmerman leaving his car and not identifying himself (and following him) provoked the initial use of force that eventually led to Zimmerman killing Trayvon. But my reading of it is that if you kill someone in self-defense then it’s not manslaughter- _even if you did something to provoke the use of force_ (so long as try to escape and/or stop fighting and indicate a desire to not fight anymore). So, even if you accept the premise that the whole thing was Zimmerman’s “fault” because he left his car, followed him, didn’t identify himself etc., it’s still not manslaughter. If it weren’t for the part in 782.07 that says “…without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776…” then I could see them arguing the “culpable negligence” led to Trayvon’s death. But doesn’t that phrase prevent them from doing so? And, if so, does the prosecution have a case for manslaughter (so long as they can’t disprove Zimmerman’s claim of reasonable fear of death or serious injury?) If not, what can they get him on? Of course, if the prosecution can convince the jury that Zimmerman was not in \*reasonable \* fear of death or serious injury but _believed_ he was so there was no “ill will” for 2nd degree murder, then I think they could convict him of manslaughter. Tell me what’s wrong with my interpretation. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4374 "2012-07-22T18:54:55Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > I don’t care when the call **Started** , I care when it **Ended** , which is 80 seconds before the 911 call from W11. AFAICT, when the call starts is related to when it ends. It’s a four minute call that starts @ 9:09. I am pretty sure that the start time has a direct impact on the end time. ymmv? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4375 "2012-07-22T18:56:17Z")
> [@emeraldia](#): > > I confirmed those numbers in: [State v. Zimmerman: Evidence Released by Prosecutor | PDF](http://www.scribd.com/doc/93951121/State-v-Zimmerman-Evidence-released-by-prosecutor) > I feel a sense of relief. I was having trouble filling in the time before. Have you examined the event log? It supports the SCSO’s version of the timeline. Is there some reason to doubt the event log and the SCSO more than we doubt Serino’s transcription? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4376 "2012-07-22T19:01:27Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > You now are arguing that the actual evidence that the prosecution entered is wrong. Actually the argument is that the evidence is CORRECT–the Event Log has the correct times on it. What is wrong is someone’s transcription of the event log as they made some notes. You can decide if the actual event log is more authoritative than notes made from it. I think the general rule it go with the more primary document which was made at the time with time stamps. Which do you find more authoritative? The event log or the notes made from the event log? Actual question. > [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > Good luck with that. You kept arguing that the \*\*start \*\* of the call of the call was wrong, even thou is was irrelevant to time from the **end** of the call and the first 911 call. Again, afaict, with a four minute call, the end time is heavily dependent on when the call starts. ymmv somehow? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4377 "2012-07-22T19:03:15Z")
> [@emeraldia](#): > > Now that everybody is in universal agreement that there is insufficient evidence Zimmerman committed 2nd degree murder (based on the current evidence), let’s talk about manslaughter. I am kind of holding out and waiting to see what the prosecution can put together before I start making those sorts of agreements. Just because I don’t see something doesn’t mean, (in my mind), that a trained professional can’t do better than me. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4378 "2012-07-22T19:20:25Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > Actually the argument is that the evidence is CORRECT–the Event Log has the correct times on it. > > What is wrong is someone’s transcription of the event log as they made some notes. > You can decide if the actual event log is more authoritative than notes made from it. > > I think the general rule it go with the more primary document which was made at the time with time stamps. > > Which do you find more authoritative? The event log or the notes made from the event log? > Actual question. > > Again, afaict, with a four minute call, the end time is heavily dependent on when the call starts. > ymmv somehow? Then **all** the calls would be wrong and the interval would still be 80 seconds. The article only had an asterisk next to the **start** time. There is no asterisk next to the \*\*end \*\*time. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4379 "2012-07-22T19:32:09Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > Then **all** the calls would be wrong and the interval would still be 80 seconds. > > The article only had an asterisk next to the **start** time. There is no asterisk next to the \*\*end \*\*time. So rather than believe that a detective looked at the call record wrong…you’re going to argue that the Sanford Police Department’s non-emergency call center is recording every one of its calls with the incorrect time? Doesn’t it hurt to be bending over backwards so far to try and not admit you’re wrong? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4380 "2012-07-22T19:32:50Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > Actually the argument is that the evidence is CORRECT–the Event Log has the correct times on it. > > What is wrong is someone’s transcription of the event log as they made some notes. > You can decide if the actual event log is more authoritative than notes made from it. > > I think the general rule it go with the more primary document which was made at the time with time stamps. > > Which do you find more authoritative? The event log or the notes made from the event log? > Actual question. > > Again, afaict, with a four minute call, the end time is heavily dependent on when the call starts. > ymmv somehow? If the end time is incorrect, then why didn’t SCSO correct that also? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4381 "2012-07-22T19:40:37Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > I am kind of holding out and waiting to see what the prosecution can put together before I start making those sorts of agreements. > > Just because I don’t see something doesn’t mean, (in my mind), that a trained professional can’t do better than me. We are down to a two minutes interval when a crime could have occurred. We have the witness statements and the physical evidence for that time. Even assuming that the prosecution are miracle workers, you can’t make bricks without straw. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=218) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=220)