# 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:** 232
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2012, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4622 "2012-07-31T23:05:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > TWEET. Penalty flag. > > The prosecution does not have to prove that Zimmerman intended to murder Martin. > > I’ve only listed the elements of second degree murder in Florida fifty or sixty times. I object, your honor. Maybe the distinction is too subtle for me. I question whether the prosecution has enough, or any, evidence that **could convince a jury** that Zimmerman intended to murder Martin. The jury will be looking at this from a “common man” point of view, people without a law degree point of view. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2012, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4623 "2012-07-31T23:44:56Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > But first, wouldn’t GZ have to show evidence that he indeed felt that fear? > > My understanding is that it’s not enough for a reasonable person to have that fear, but the defendant must actually have had that reasonable fear as well. > > At the moment, there’s been no indication that G had that fear. It would only take GZ saying that he had it to amount to some evidence that he such a fear. > But he has not, afaik, said that he such a fear. > > So even if a jury decided that it was reasonable to feel that fear, if there’s no evidence that GZ actually had that fear. > > Have I missed something? Yes. You’re absolutely right that if fear were an element of the offense, then some testimony would have to place that fear into evidence. But here, we’re not talking about an element of the offense, but an element of the defense. For this, the jury is allowed to infer fear from the actions, words, or circumstances that are in evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2012, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4624 "2012-07-31T23:55:18Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I object, your honor. > > Maybe the distinction is too subtle for me. I question whether the prosecution has enough, or any, evidence that **could convince a jury** that Zimmerman intended to murder Martin. The jury will be looking at this from a “common man” point of view, people without a law degree point of view. Zimmerman is charged with second degree murder. To prove his guilt, the prosecution must prove: 1. Treyvon Martin is dead. 2. The death was caused by the criminal act of George Zimmerman. 3. There was an unlawful killing of Treyvon Martin by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life. 4. George Zimmerman did not reasonably believe that his use of deadly force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. 5. The killing happened in Seminole County in the State of Florida. That’s all. The prosecution does NOT have to prove that Zimmerman intended to murder Martin. If they had charged him with first degree murder, they would. But not second degree. And this isn’t lost on a “common man” point of view, people without a law degree point of view. Because the jury will get a set of instructions that lay this out very clearly. They won’t simply be asked, “Guilty or not guilty?” They will be told each and every element, and asked on the form to indicate that they have found each and every element. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4625 "2012-08-01T00:06:11Z")
[http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-31/news/os-zimmerman-judge-stand-your-ground-20120731\_1\_zimmerman-case-trayvon-martin-case-george-zimmerman](http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-31/news/os-zimmerman-judge-stand-your-ground-20120731_1_zimmerman-case-trayvon-martin-case-george-zimmerman) I’ll try to provide a link to another newspaper. Point of interest. Anita Smithey filed for the SYG hearing back in October. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4626 "2012-08-01T00:34:47Z")
> [@emeraldia](#): > > Yeah, his loud screams for help heard on the 911 calls. Those show that he thought he needed help. But they don’t seem to establish that he shot TM because of a reasonable fear based on something outside of the one which GZ mentioned–TM going for the gun. imho. ymmv. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4627 "2012-08-01T00:46:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But here, we’re not talking about an element of the offense, but an element of the defense. For this, the jury is allowed to infer fear from the actions, words, or circumstances that are in evidence. Cool. So a juror is allowed to create his or her own case (more or less) based on what they have determined to be the facts w/o regard to any rationale which is presented or not presented by the defense. That’d be handy if I were the defendant. Hopefully, I’ll never have any need of that from a juror. But, sometimes people end up neck deep in craziness through no fault of their own. Of course, if I were a juror, the fact that GZ doesn’t report or show signs of doing diddly during his beating–not even some of the basic reflexive actions I would expect–would weigh in my decision about what his state of mind was during the beating if I chose to find that there was such a beating. He obviously was injured. But given what I see as significant problems with his story and the timeline, I don’t think I would be inclined to give his account very much weight in areas where it wasn’t independently corroborated. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4628 "2012-08-01T02:17:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Zimmerman is charged with second degree murder. To prove his guilt, the prosecution must prove: > > 1. Treyvon Martin is dead. > > 2. The death was caused by the criminal act of George Zimmerman. > > 3. There was an unlawful killing of Treyvon Martin by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life. > > 4. George Zimmerman did not reasonably believe that his use of deadly force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. > > 5. The killing happened in Seminole County in the State of Florida. > > That’s all. The prosecution does NOT have to prove that Zimmerman intended to murder Martin. > > If they had charged him with first degree murder, they would. But not second degree. > > And this isn’t lost on a “common man” point of view, people without a law degree point of view. Because the jury will get a set of instructions that lay this out very clearly. They won’t simply be asked, “Guilty or not guilty?” They will be told each and every element, and asked on the form to indicate that they have found each and every element. I do have a question. Isn’t every ambiguity in a case supposed to be in favor of the defendant? ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4629 "2012-08-01T12:32:57Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If Martin was fearful he had ample time to leisurely be anywhere else other than the T intersection. If Zimmerman was fearful he had ample opportunity to get back to his truck. Hey, wait a minute… ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4630 "2012-08-01T13:48:38Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > If Zimmerman was fearful he had ample opportunity to get back to his truck. Hey, wait a minute… Isn’t that where Zimmerman said he was headed? Trayvon’s girlfriend said Trayvon was near his father’s house, and a few minutes later the fight ensued near the T. If Trayvon was still at the T several minutes earlier Zimmerman would still have been on the phone with the dispatcher while Zimmerman walked by the T, and the two would have literally bumped into each other. Either DeeDee’s account of things is ill remembered, or Trayvon Martin returned to the T, as Zimmerman claimed. Trayvon Martin had ample opportunity to leave the area. ---
**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:** [August 1, 2012, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4631 "2012-08-01T14:08:53Z")
> [@hmarvin](#): > > Isn’t that where Zimmerman said he was headed? So he says … so he says. But then so many things Zimmerman says later turn out to be not the case at all. So where does that leave us? I mean, somehow he was shot a fair distance down the sidewalk away from the T, so how did that happen if Zimmerman stopped at the T and then started back for his Truck? Wouldn’t the shooting have then occurred on the way back to his truck somewhere? How did it happen where it did if Zimmerman was really on the way back to his truck from the T when Martin ‘jumped him from behind’? It doesn’t add up at all. > [@hmarvin](#): > > Trayvon’s girlfriend said Trayvon was near his father’s house, and a few minutes later the fight ensued near the T. The T _is_ near his father’s house though. You are using too narrow a definition of the word near. It doesn’t necessarily mean literally within arms reach of the house. He’s talking to his girlfriend in another city who is worried about him being followed by a creep in the dark. He could have said he was near the house to reassure her while he was hiding from the creep (again near the house, since its pretty much right there at the end of the sidewalk right). So you can’t conclude that he went all the way to within arms reach of the house and then came back to the T itching to beat on Zimmerman. You can assume thats what happened, but it is far from an established fact and is not proven by anything in evidence. I play tennis all the time at the courts near my house. They are 3 blocks away. But they are still ‘near’ my house, correct? So if I say I’m playing tennis near my house, does that mean to you that I’m somehow playing in my backyard or something? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4632 "2012-08-01T14:12:47Z")
[http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/judge-neighborhood-watch-case-step-16903806#.UBkz\_GGe7No](http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/judge-neighborhood-watch-case-step-16903806#.UBkz_GGe7No) ---
**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:** [August 1, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4633 "2012-08-01T14:24:48Z")
Why was Martin under any obligation to leave the area? Why was him merely being outside instead of at home taken as evidence that he intended to “rumble” with Zimmerman, but the fact that: 1. Zimmerman exited from his truck with a gun just as soon as _Martin ran away from him_, 2. while doing this, he flat out told the dispatcher that he was following Martin, and 3. he wound up shooting Martin no where near the T… …how is none of this evidence of Zimmerman’s culpability, and yet Martin’s failure to conclusively demonstrate outright terror somehow means he was the likely aggressor? This logic is so twisted and bizarre…I feel like I’m staring at a three-headed duckbill platypus reading some of yall’s posts. ---
**Author:** ![sugaree](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@sugaree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sugaree)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4634 "2012-08-01T14:34:46Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > You really need to familiarize yourself with the evidence. Martin was using a wired headset. It is on the property list. You can actually see him talking on it on the 7-11 video. Of course, it would still be less than visible at night with a hoodie up. It is hard to take your opinion seriously when you screw even basic facts. The basic point being made here doesn’t change if Martin was on a bluetooth device rather than a wired headset. The point is that a person on a hands free call appears spaced-out. You could have even corrected the factual mistake and addressed the actual issue at the same time. But if we’re being incredibly nitpicky > [@Shodan](#): > > The State of Florida will have to come up with evidence for what they allege. I haven’t seen any from them, and you don’t seem to have any. > So throw out all the other parts that aren’t backed up by evidence, on both sides. What you have left is not enough to convict anyone of second-degree murder. > > What’s the evidence that Zimmerman got out of his truck to follow Martin? There isn’t any. What’s the evidence that he didn’t? The fact that, earlier, Zimmerman said “Those assholes, they always get away”. Ergo, he thought Martin got away. So the evidence to date is in favor of Zimmerman’s account, in that respect, being true. > > What’s the evidence that Zimmerman was first to initiate violence? There isn’t any. What’s the evidence that Martin was the first? The scrape on Martin’s knuckle, the black eyes and bloody nose on Zimmerman, and the lack of any other injury to Martin. So the evidence to date is in favor of Zimmerman’s account, in that respect, being true. > > What’s the evidence that Martin was screaming for help? There isn’t any - Martin’s parents’ first evidence was the the screams did not come from their son. The sound experts who alleged they could tell that it was Martin have been refuted (to the degree necessary outside court) by other experts who say they could not tell any such thing. What’s the evidence that Zimmerman was screaming for help? We know someone was from the 9/11 call, and the obvious fact is that no one screams for help while beating the crap out of someone else. And the nature of Zimmerman’s injuries show that he was very much on the wrong side of the beating. So the evidence to date is in favor of Zimmerman’s account, in that respect, being true. > > What is the evidence that Martin was not on top of Zimmerman bashing his head on the ground? There isn’t any, and the State will have to disprove this if and when they get to court. What is the evidence that Martin was on top of Zimmerman bashing his head on the ground? The injuries to the back of Zimmerman’s head, and the eyewitness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. So the evidence to date is in favor of Zimmerman’s account, in that respect, being true. > > What is the evidence that Zimmerman was not in fear of his life? There isn’t any, and the State will have to disprove this, if and when they get to court. What’s the evidence that Zimmerman was in fear of his life? The simple fact that most people recognize that a reasonable person would fear death or serious injury if a stranger sucker-punched you, jumped on your chest, and bashed your head on the ground. So the evidence to date is in favor of Zimmerman’s account, in that respect, being true. > > So, leaving out everything that has no evidence one way or the other, what do we have? > > Zimmerman was driving in his truck, spotted someone suspicious, and called it in to 9/11. He then lost sight of the person he was following. The 911 operator told him that he didn’t need to follow the person. Zimmerman wanted to meet the cops, and pulled over to get the number off the sign so he could give an exact location. When he got out of his truck, he spotted Martin. They exchanged words, and Martin attacked, knocking him down and beating his head on the ground. They struggled for a few seconds, but Martin was getting the best of it. Zimmerman, fearing for his life, drew his weapon and fired once, from a few inches away. Martin died almost at once. Zimmerman rolled Martin off him, leaned over to check if he was dead, and almost at once the cops arrived. > > And that’s the same story Zimmerman has been telling all along. > > Is every word of it true? I dunno. But it is backed up by evidence. Are the other parts of Zimmerman’s testimony true, if they aren’t backed up? Doesn’t matter, because [list=a][li]he doesn’t have to prove them true, the State has to prove they’re not, and [\*]most of the details being nitpicked in this monster of a thread aren’t relevant to a determination of guilt.[/list]I doubt we will ever know if Martin really said “You got me” when he was shot. Who cares? It doesn’t make any difference if he did or not. Zimmerman said he was looking for a house number, and another time he said he was looking for a street sign. Big whoop - he misspoke one time or other. [/li] > Zimmerman is not too bright. No duh. If he had any sense, he would do what you do in a situation like that, guilty or not - lawyer up, and keep your trap shut. But he didn’t - and here we are. > > Regards, > Shodan Martin’s knuckle was not injured. Martin’s parents plural did not say that the scream was not from their son. His mother identified the screams as being his right from the start. His father originally did not, via a whispered no, but come on: the guy just lost his son, is being made to listen to heartrending screams made during the shooting: is anyone surprised that he might have whispered “no,” no matter what he really thought here? Per his account, Zimmerman did not check to see if Martin was dead. Rather, his story is that he didn’t realize Martin was shot, and was attempting to restrain him. What’s the evidence that Zimmerman got out of his truck to follow Martin? Well, if we can believe anything that Zimmerman says, the evidence is that Zimmerman said “I meant that I was going in the same direction as him, to keep an eye on him so that I could tell the police where he was going.” What difference does it make if Martin said “you got me” or not? It makes a huge difference if we are deciding to believe anything that Zimmerman says or not. As you point out, Martin died almost at once, and even before technical brain death would have set in, would not have had the ability to sit up and speak. So Zimmerman either: a) hallucinated the you got me part of the evening or b) made it up right out of whole cloth. Thus, how can we believe a word he says? Why would anyone with a clear conscience and a story of straight-up self-defense feel the need to gild the lily and add on conversation? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4635 "2012-08-01T14:40:38Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > Cool. So a juror is allowed to create his or her own case (more or less) based on what they have determined to be the facts w/o regard to any rationale which is presented or not presented by the defense. Not out of whole cloth. But if a person is struck by a fist and suffers a broken nose, to infer that the person felt fear is hardly “w/o regard to any rationale,” is it? > [@](#): > > Of course, if I were a juror, the fact that GZ doesn’t report or show signs of doing diddly during his beating–not even some of the basic reflexive actions I would expect–would weigh in my decision about what his state of mind was during the beating if I chose to find that there was such a beating. > He obviously was injured. > But given what I see as significant problems with his story and the timeline, I don’t think I would be inclined to give his account very much weight in areas where it wasn’t independently corroborated. Well, that’s of course up to you. But you might want to turn the question around. For each of the elements I listed above — the ones the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt – ask yourself what evidence you’d rely upon to conclude it. And remember that you CANNOT rely on inference for an element of the crime. Some of them are easy – no one questions the finding that the killing happened in Seminole County, in the state of Florida. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4636 "2012-08-01T14:44:44Z")
> [@sugaree](#): > > As you point out, Martin died almost at once, and even before technical brain death would have set in, would not have had the ability to sit up and speak. How do we know this to be true? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4637 "2012-08-01T14:54:22Z")
> [@sugaree](#): > > Martin’s knuckle was not injured. > [@](#): > > Autopsy results confirm that Trayvon Martin sustained injuries to his knuckles before he was gunned down in a Florida gated community. [Cite](http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-16/news/31732179_1_autopsy-results-knuckles-injuries) _:shrugs:_ Regards, Shodan ---
**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:** [August 1, 2012, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4638 "2012-08-01T15:09:10Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > [Cite](http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-16/news/31732179_1_autopsy-results-knuckles-injuries) > > _:shrugs:_ > > Regards, > Shodan A tiny scratch below one knuckle on his left hand. I’ve gotten similar ‘injuries’ from reaching into a cabinet, opening a door, playing basketball, opening a can of tennis balls, pulling a hard drive out of a computer, putting on my shoes, opening a window, and many other ordinary activities. You are certain that this must have come from a sustained, savage beating? This is proof of savage and sustained violence to you? ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4639 "2012-08-01T15:20:40Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > A tiny scratch below one knuckle on his left hand. > > I’ve gotten similar ‘injuries’ from reaching into a cabinet, opening a door, playing basketball, opening a can of tennis balls, pulling a hard drive out of a computer, putting on my shoes, opening a window, and many other ordinary activities. > > You are certain that this must have come from a sustained, savage beating? This is proof of savage and sustained violence to you? And George says he was punched in the face ‘over a dozen times’. [This](http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_george_zimmerman_ll_120518_wg.jpg)does not look like the face of a man punched over a dozen times. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4640 "2012-08-01T15:31:21Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > You are certain that this must have come from a sustained, savage beating? This is proof of savage and sustained violence to you? This is evidence that the part of Zimmerman’s account claiming that Martin sucker punched him in the face, breaking his nose and blackening his eyes, is true. It is also evidence that Martin was the first to initiate violence. The lacerations to the back of Zimmerman’s head are evidence that the part of Zimmerman’s account where he says Martin was on top of him beating his head on the ground, is true. (This part of the account is also backed up by witnesses who said they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman.) So, again, assuming to be true only those parts of Zimmerman’s account which are backed up by evidence, Martin attacked Zimmerman, blackening his eyes and breaking his nose, then jumped on top of him and bashed his head on the ground. ISTM that it is reasonable to classify a beating which breaks your nose, blackens your eyes, and puts gashes in the back of your head, as ‘serious’. ‘Sustained’? Depends on your definitions - the fight went on for what, a minute or so? ‘Savage’ is too emotive a word to admit of exact definition - I would say that an attack that inflicted that kind of injury, and which was legally and morally unprovoked, could be classified that way. Regards, Shodan ---
**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:** [August 1, 2012, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/4641 "2012-08-01T15:31:29Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > What’s the evidence that Zimmerman got out of his truck to follow Martin? There isn’t any. Well this is just more duckbill platypus hilarity. Zimmerman’s own words are evidence that he exited his truck to follow Martin. [From his call with SPD](http://bizsecurity.about.com/od/creatingpolicies/a/A-Transcript-Of-The-George-Zimmerman-Police-Call.htm): > [@](#): > > Zimmerman: No you go in straight through the entrance and then you make a left, uh, you go straight in, don’t turn, and make a left. (expletive) he’s running. > > \*Ambient sounds are heard which may be Zimmerman unbuckling his seat belt and his vehicle’s “open door” chime sounding. The change in his voice and the sound of wind against his cell phone mic indicate that he has left his vehicle and is now walking. The dispatcher seems to pick up on these changes and sounds concerned when he later asks Zimmerman if he is following Martin. \* > > Dispatcher: He’s running? Which way is he running? > > Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood. > > Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards? > > Zimmerman: The back entrance…(expletive)(unclear) > > Dispatcher: **Are you following him?** > > Zimmerman: **Yeah**. In your world, what do you think this is evidence of? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=231) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=233)