# 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:** 365
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7283 "2012-11-11T10:27:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > In the re-enactment he states that he doesn’t remember exactly how Martin got on top of him and he said he was trying to push him away. It’s clear from his description that it was a moving event. “Moving,” as opposed to utterly stock still, yes. But “moving,” as in traversing lateral distance? No, I don’t agree. For the re-enactment up to that point, Zimmerman and Serino walked along, covering the area that Zimmerman was standing as each event happened. Why should it be that for this particular event, Zimmerman stood still even while his narrative meant to convey additional movement? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7284 "2012-11-11T11:01:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > “Moving,” as opposed to utterly stock still, yes. But “moving,” as in traversing lateral distance? No, I don’t agree. For the re-enactment up to that point, Zimmerman and Serino walked along, covering the area that Zimmerman was standing as each event happened. Why should it be that for this particular event, Zimmerman stood still even while his narrative meant to convey additional movement? he showed movement in his re-enactment of where the fight started to where it ended. I’m not following you. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7285 "2012-11-11T11:21:19Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I already did but I restate it. The upper back of the gun. The front of the gun is out of sight to the left. > > The back of the gun starting from the ejection chamber. It appears the edge of the ejection chamber is reflecting as well as the beveled edge along the top. The reflection is broken up towards the back of the gun where the finger grips are machined into it. So, you think he is holding the gun handle upside down beside his ear, with the barrel pointing to the left in the picture? Whatever for? > [@Magiver](#): > > you’re guess may be correct but he makes 2 different statements that either conflict with each other or are in addition to each other. Are you still undecided? > [@Magiver](#): > > In the first interview he says he goes outside after the shot. A conversation ensues about calling Zimmerman’s wife. I know the first interview is brief, but it’s what he doesn’t say that is important, and he doesn’t say the conversation he had with Z was while Z was still astride TM and that he refused Z’s plea for help. > [@Magiver](#): > > On the second interview he says he goes through the garage and comes around the corner. Yes,he’d probably been losing sleep over how inefficient the first interview was and was glad to add more details to someone who actually seemed interested. > [@Magiver](#): > > I > Zimmerman says his first contact is someone who opened the back door behind him. We’re talking about his first contact after the fight had finished, not while it was still ongoing. > [@Magiver](#): > > I > Witness 13 states that Zimmerman asks him to call his wife and then the police come and handcuff him. He also says the police come to arrest him and then Zimmerman asks to call his wife. Watch Z’s reenactment vid again from 11:23 to 11:56. Is his testimony here as believable as the previous 60 seconds? > [@Magiver](#): > > I > He never mentions taking the picture. Well, not to the first interviewer, but I blame that on the interviewing officer who hadn’t driven home the importance of telling everything he saw and did involving the accused. He does tell the FDLE. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7286 "2012-11-11T11:24:24Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > he showed movement in his re-enactment of where the fight started to where it ended. I’m not following you. Are you serious? They didn’t even go to the spot where Z was last on top of TM. This “reenactment” was a bit of a sham, really. When Serino turned up at Z’s house and Z came out wearing his nice slacks and white t-shirt, Serino should have told him to change his clothes, as he was going to be rolling on the floor later. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7287 "2012-11-11T11:52:36Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Are you serious? They didn’t even go to the spot where Z was last on top of TM. so? do you understand that a narrative walk-through doesn’t require the physical duplication of his movements? [/quote] This “reenactment” was a bit of a sham, really. When Serino turned up at Z’s house and Z came out wearing his nice slacks and white t-shirt, Serino should have told him to change his clothes, as he was going to be rolling on the floor later. [/QUOTE] Why would he be rolling on the floor later? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7288 "2012-11-11T11:58:25Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > So, you think he is holding the gun handle upside down beside his ear, with the barrel pointing to the left in the picture? Whatever for? how did you manage to restate the exact opposite of what I said? You’re looking at Zimmerman holding the gun in his right hand in the normal position and it’s not up to his ear. It’s away from his head. That’s the only way it would produce a shadow on his arm. The reflection and lack of reflection along the edge matches the bevel and grip relief cuts ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7289 "2012-11-11T12:02:24Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > so? do you understand that a narrative walk-through doesn’t require the physical duplication of his movements? What IS the point then, if it’s not to get a more accurate interpretation of the events that have been described, and the time scales involved? I’m sure it wasn’t just meant to serve the purpose of reinforcing Z’s narrative. Why even do a reenactment when you haven’t even got the NEN call the person had made to enable him to match moments on the call specifically to places on his journey? If Z had said he travelled from A to B in x time, and x time was impossible, there you have a hole in his defence. If Z says he parked at spot y and somebody else says that wasn’t the case, there’s another hole. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7290 "2012-11-11T12:13:52Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > I know the first interview is brief, but it’s what he doesn’t say that is important, and he doesn’t say the conversation he had with Z was while Z was still astride TM and that he refused Z’s plea for help. correct but he also says he goes outside when his wife says someone was shot and a man was hunched over. In the next interview he says he goes through the garage and comes around the corner. He then contradicts himself about when the call is made and leaves out the picture taking in both videos. He has to be prodded. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Yes,he’d probably been losing sleep over how inefficient the first interview was and was glad to add more details to someone who actually seemed interested. :rolleyes: > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > We’re talking about his first contact after the fight had finished, not while it was still ongoing. yes we are. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Watch Z’s reenactment vid again from 11:23 to 11:56. Is his testimony here as believable as the previous 60 seconds? his account is not contradicted by evidence. Martin’s body position is covered. The shooting is covered. The beating is covered. The location where it started is covered. The events prior to that are covered. Nothing to date has shown any of this to be false. This is what the court has to do to convict him. Not that you will ever understand that. Your entire argument is that he lied about “something” which you cannot prove therefore he murdered Martin. That is not a court case. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Well, not to the first interviewer, but I blame that on the interviewing officer who hadn’t driven home the importance of telling everything he saw and did involving the accused. He does tell the FDLE. What evidence do you have to accuse the officers of truncating the interviews. They asked for statements from everyone including Zimmerman. They then had the opportunity to review these and go back and ask again. This is how you clarify information and catch someone in a lie. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7291 "2012-11-11T12:27:24Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > What IS the point then, if it’s not to get a more accurate interpretation of the events that have been described, and the time scales involved? I’m sure it wasn’t just meant to serve the purpose of reinforcing Z’s narrative. the point is to go over his testimony. It can reinforce or it can expose a relevant falsehood. He’s not expected to recall perfectly. But if he says Martin stabbed him in the leg and there is no wound that is a verifiable falsehood. If he says the fight travels down the sidewalk from where it started then the relevant point is that it moved away from the original spot and not the precise distance. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Why even do a reenactment when you haven’t even got the NEN call the person had made to enable him to match moments on the call specifically to places on his journey? to match against it, not with it. This is how you reinforce or expose a relevant falsehood just as asking him repeatedly in a sit-down interview does. It’s one more form of interrogation. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > If Z had said he travelled from A to B in x time, and x time was impossible, there you have a hole in his defence. If Z says he parked at spot y and somebody else says that wasn’t the case, there’s another hole. wow, this is just so bizarre that you keep bringing it up. Zimmerman never says he traveled from point A to point B in X amount of time. He’s never asked. It has no bearing on the case. He has no way of knowing either of these variables and it doesn’t change the narrative of the events. We know he parked his truck and we know he ran after Martin and we know there is a time gap of minutes before the confrontation occurs and we know where it occurs. There is no “hole” to be found in his defense. His defense starts at the beginning of the fight and ends with him shooting and then frisking Martin. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7292 "2012-11-11T12:28:39Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Why would he be rolling on the floor later? I’m not saying that Z could be made to do anything like that, but Z should have expected that he might be _asked_ to get on the ground and demonstrate to the best of his memory what happened. Not just stand 10 yds away and point vaguely to where it might have happened. Z is supposed to be illustrating specific events that are going to be important in interpreting whether he faces charges for killing a teenager, not just giving a brief outline that he can wriggle out of later. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7293 "2012-11-11T12:37:05Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > I’m not saying that Z could be made to do anything like that, but Z should have expected that he might be _asked_ to get on the ground and demonstrate to the best of his memory what happened. > > Not just stand 10 yds away and point vaguely to where it might have happened. Z is supposed to be illustrating specific events that are going to be important in interpreting whether he faces charges for killing a teenager, not just giving a brief outline that he can wriggle out of later. honestly, it sounds like you’re basing your expectations on TV crime shows. I do think after comparing early and later interviews that the investigators are hurting the prosecution case with their methodology. There is a significant amount of prodding involved in their questions. This is actually a very hard thing to avoid doing when trying to clarify an earlier statement. It interferes in the process of gathering missed information and it reinforces memories that may or may not have been correctly stated at the time. The same thing applies to Zimmerman’s 5 hr questioning. About the only thing an interviewer should do is repeat what was said and ask what happened next. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7294 "2012-11-11T12:43:26Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > wow, this is just so bizarre that you keep bringing it up. > > Zimmerman never says he traveled from point A to point B in X amount of time. It’s called an EXAMPLE of the kind of thing that might be important in determing the validity of a case. > [@Magiver](#): > > He’s never asked. It has no bearing on the case. See above. > [@Magiver](#): > > He has no way of knowing either of these variables and it doesn’t change the narrative of the events. See above again. > [@Magiver](#): > > We know he parked his truck Knowing he parked it is such an obvious statement, I can’t understand why you’d point it out. The important bit is WHERE he parked it. And even there in his “narrative/reenactment,” we are asked to believe that he parked up where he did in the reenactment(see him pointing over to the little sign on the grass as they pulled up?) rather than pull up right in front of the truck ahead and begin his chase to “keep an eye on Trayvon.” > [@Magiver](#): > > and we know he ran after Martin and we know there is a time gap of minutes before the confrontation occurs and we know where it occurs. There is no “hole” to be found in his defense. His defense starts at the beginning of the fight and ends with him shooting and then frisking Martin. Yes, we KNOW he ran after TM, even if in the reenactment he made out like he just casually strode in the general direction TM had gone. We know EXACTLY how much time passed from Z getting out of his vehicle, to where he is supposedly heading back to his vehicle, and by Z’s own reckoning, the attack happened only moments after he’d ended his phone call, but we also know that didn’t happen, either. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7295 "2012-11-11T13:03:55Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > The important bit is WHERE he parked it. That’s not even slightly important. Frankly, neither Martin’s nor Zimmerman’s movements before the fight started are important to the case. What matters is whether Zimmerman was entitled to shoot Martin, and what determines that is the level of fear Martin put him in, and, depending on other circumstances, whether Martin was restraining Zimmerman at the instant the shot was fired. What he did before - or for that matter after - the fight isn’t relevant to the self defence claim. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7296 "2012-11-11T13:05:03Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > honestly, it sounds like you’re basing your expectations on TV crime shows. No, I’m basing my expectations on the police doing a proper job of investigating potential murderers, using all the resources and wiles they have, and on a man who wants to be cleared of killing a 17yr old who was minding his own business, being prepared to get down on the floor to show how he remembered the struggle progressing and maybe try and pin down EXACTLY where the fight occurred. > [@Magiver](#): > > I do think after comparing early and later interviews that the investigators are hurting the prosecution case with their methodology. There is a significant amount of prodding involved in their questions. This is actually a very hard thing to avoid doing when trying to clarify an earlier statement. It interferes in the process of gathering missed information and it reinforces memories that may or may not have been correctly stated at the time. The first interview with W13 could never be described as sufficient for purpose. > [@Magiver](#): > > The same thing applies to Zimmerman’s 5 hr questioning. About the only thing an interviewer should do is repeat what was said and ask what happened next. Zimmerman was at the station for 5 hours. I can’t find his interview with Singleton, but I’m sure it wont have lasted 5 hours, with Serino just popping in for a pep talk with Z before letting him go. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7297 "2012-11-11T13:11:32Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > It’s called an EXAMPLE of the kind of thing that might be important in determing the validity of a case. No dimmy, it’s not. The case starts at the fight. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Knowing he parked it is such an obvious statement, I can’t understand why you’d point it out. The important bit is WHERE he parked it. And even there in his “narrative/reenactment,” we are asked to believe that he parked up where he did in the reenactment(see him pointing over to the little sign on the grass as they pulled up?) rather than pull up right in front of the truck ahead and begin his chase to “keep an eye on Trayvon.” Yes, we’re asked to believe it because there is no contrary evidence to suggest it didn’t happen this way. There is no reason to pull up to the spot when he can point to it. There’s no reason to run because he can’t duplicate the speed he was running or how long he was running. Such an exercise produces no additional information because we know where the fight took place. Trying to prove he couldn’t have done it in the allotted time defies the logic that it happened. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Yes, we KNOW he ran after TM, even if in the reenactment he made out like he just casually strode in the general direction TM had gone. We know EXACTLY how much time passed from Z getting out of his vehicle, to where he is supposedly heading back to his vehicle, and by Z’s own reckoning, the attack happened only moments after he’d ended his phone call, but we also know that didn’t happen, either. No, we don’t know EXACTLY how much time passed before he started back toward his vehicle. We don’t know how fast he moved when he ran toward the back of the houses or exactly how long the running time was. We have a rough idea. It’s not relevant unless there is evidence that he parked somewhere else and ran somewhere else. There is no such evidence. You simply don’t grasp that in the absence of conflicting evidence the remaining evidence is what will be used. As far as I can tell, your train of thought is that it could have happened another way, therefore we can assume it happened (if we don’t believe Zimmerman) and convict him of it. You need proof it happened another way. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7298 "2012-11-11T13:12:06Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > That’s not even slightly important. Frankly, neither Martin’s nor Zimmerman’s movements before the fight started are important to the case. What matters is whether Zimmerman was entitled to shoot Martin, and what determines that is the level of fear Martin put him in, and, depending on other circumstances, whether Martin was restraining Zimmerman at the instant the shot was fired. > > What he did before - or for that matter after - the fight isn’t relevant to the self defence claim. How can it NOT be important? Are you saying that if Z’s car was parked at the first gap between the houses, ahead of TM’s route home, suggesting he had cut through the gap and headed TM off, that wouldn’t change your picture of how events transpired? I just want confirmation that Z is being as honest as he can in his recollections, wherever it is available, and knowing for sure where he got out of his car to chase in the direction of TM would be a point in his favour, and from where I’m sat he needs a few of them. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7299 "2012-11-11T13:15:07Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > No dimmy, it’s not. The case starts at the fight. No, it doesn’t. Z wasn’t transported to the T by aliens. He got there by his own decisions, and we all know how warped they were. > [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, we’re asked to believe it because there is no contrary evidence to suggest it didn’t happen this way. There is no reason to pull up to the spot when he can point to it. There’s no reason to run because he can’t duplicate the speed he was running or how long he was running. Such an exercise produces no additional information because we know where the fight took place. Trying to prove he couldn’t have done it in the allotted time defies the logic that it happened. > No, we don’t know EXACTLY how much time passed before he started back toward his vehicle. We don’t know how fast he moved when he ran toward the back of the houses or exactly how long the running time was. We have a rough idea. It’s not relevant unless there is evidence that he parked somewhere else and ran somewhere else. There is no such evidence. You simply don’t grasp that in the absence of conflicting evidence the remaining evidence is what will be used. > > As far as I can tell, your train of thought is that it could have happened another way, therefore we can assume it happened (if we don’t believe Zimmerman) and convict him of it. You need proof it happened another way. Not in this thread, I dont. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7300 "2012-11-11T13:20:18Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > No, I’m basing my expectations on the police doing a proper job of investigating potential murderers, using all the resources and wiles they have, and on a man who wants to be cleared of killing a 17yr old who was minding his own business, being prepared to get down on the floor to show how he remembered the struggle progressing and maybe try and pin down EXACTLY where the fight occurred. It’s not possible to pin down the exact anything and your expectations of the investigation are your opinion. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > The first interview with W13 could never be described as sufficient for purpose. why would you think it was meant to? > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Zimmerman was at the station for 5 hours. I can’t find his interview with Singleton, but I’m sure it wont have lasted 5 hours, with Serino just popping in for a pep talk with Z before letting him go. OK, you’re doing it again. You’ve just thrown your imagination of what happened on the wall to see if any of it sticks. You’ve accused Serino of incompetence without a single piece of information. This is the hallmark of a lynching mentality. You’re SURE of something with absolutely no information at all. What you fail to understand is that those explaining the case believe that it’s possible that Zimmerman was planning on making a lamp shade out of Martin. There’s just no evidence he was. “Anything is possible” is not how we operate our court systems. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7301 "2012-11-11T13:32:33Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > How can it NOT be important? Are you saying that if Z’s car was parked at the first gap between the houses, ahead of TM’s route home, suggesting he had cut through the gap and headed TM off, that wouldn’t change your picture of how events transpired? yes dimmy it would. But there is no evidence that this happened. How can you not understand this. There are literally an infinite number of things that could have happened that night. LITERALLY. Without evidence you can’t suggest it happened in court. We do have an ear witness that 2 people ran by. Now maybe she only heard Martin because he ran between the houses and circled twice passed her house. OR, as much as it pains you, it reinforces Zimmerman’s account and does not refute it that they both ran past her house. He has no way of knowing she heard this when he gave his statement. He has no way of knowing what people saw when they gave their statements. And not one person is going to precisely recall the events correctly. This is the reality of the evidence we are dealing with. In fact, if I recall correctly the woman who heard someone running first said they were back to back and then later changed it to a staggered amount of time. was she influenced by hearing other people talk or news reports? We can’t know. But we do know that both parties said they lost sight of each other and Martin had a head start so it’s logical to assume the 2 running events were spaced out. > [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > I just want confirmation that Z is being as honest as he can in his recollections, wherever it is available, and knowing for sure where he got out of his car to chase in the direction of TM would be a point in his favour, and from where I’m sat he needs a few of them. Yes dimmy, we all would like a video recording of exactly what happened start to finish. In 3D. From 8 angles of perspective. With Jesus Christ personally narrating the video. That would be swell. In the meantime we have to deal with the evidence at hand. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/7302 "2012-11-11T13:44:35Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > About the only thing an interviewer should do is repeat what was said and ask what happened next. You mean like in these snippets from Serino’s transcripts? > [@](#): > > Serino: OK, um, you follow this person, this person, you lose sight of this person, you’re walking in the darkness out there…you have a flashlight? > Zimmerman: It was dead. I had one, but it was dead. > Serino: Uh, you had to hit it couple times, it’s on right now. So… > Zimmerman: Oh it is? > Serino: OK. Um, it’s probably like the one I have, you gotta smack it around a couple times. Um, this person jumped, jumped you from somewhere? > Zimmerman: Yes, sir. > Serino: From the darkness? > Zimmerman: Yes, sir. > Serino: Did he say anything to you? > Zimmerman: Yes, sir. > Serino: What did he say to you? > Zimmerman: When he came up to me, he said, “You got a problem?” and I said no. And then I went to reach for my phone to find my phone to call 911 instead of non-emergency. > Serino: OK. > Zimmerman: And then is when he punched me. He said, “You have a problem now.” And then he punched me in the face. > Serino: Oh, so he said, OK, you have a problem now. OK, he punched and you fell? > Zimmerman: **Yes, sir.** Here would be a good point to commit Z towards adding a little more detail, but Serino skips right by it. He definitely hasn’t followed your advice in his 2nd interview. > [@](#): > > Serino: **OK. Reason I ask that is because…I gotta know how you’re doing up here. OK. Usually taking a life bears a lot of stuff with it. OK. And I’ve been around other people that’ve been through it, and, you know, that’s first and foremost, OK? The responsibility behind all this is probably more than you’d ever imagine. OK. You’re thinking you’re out there doing Neighborhood Watch thing, a good thing, um, everything’s sort of, ah the stars are aligned correctly, you guys been victimized from burglaries, and I’ve seen you guys Space page about, uh, Facebook page about kudos for the arrest and whatever kind of stuff. You guys doing a good thing out there stopping the bad guys who’re breaking in stealing people’s stuff, right? Um, what happened this evening is that you essentially saw somebody who you in good faith thought was doing something wrong.** > Zimmerman: Yes, sir. > Serino: And…you ever hear of Murphy’s Law? > Zimmerman: Yes, sir. > Serino: OK, that’s what happened. This person was not doing anything bad. Um, you know the name of the person that night? > Zimmerman: Tayvon? > Serino: Trayvon. > Zimmerman: Trayvon? Martin? > Serino: Trayvon Benjamin Martin. He was born in 1995, February the 5th. He was 17 years old. An athlete, um, probably somewhere, somebody who was gonna be in avionautics, um, a kid with a future. A kid with folks that care. In his possession we found a, uh, can of, uh, iced tea and a bag of Skittles. And about $40 in cash. Not a goon. Um, you have any prior training in law enforcement, at all? I mean, any kind of… > Zimmerman: Just the law books I…(unintelligible) > Serino: Constitutional law > Zimmerman: ..aa…(unintelligible) > Serino: OK, so you went through the…OK. But as far as identifying people and stuff like that as far as what to look for, what to make them really suspicious? > Zimmerman: Um, just when we organized an annual, ah, Neighborhood Watch event. They told us…like a, I think, a PowerPoint presentation. > Serino: OK, I wasn’t privy to that, but if you guys continue Neighborhood Watch, um, typically speaking at nighttime, um, the garb is black on black on black, with a black hoodie. Now this guy had a dark grey hoodie. It was dark, but his pants were beige. Not quite your, you know, your prime suspect type. But, um, I listened to the phone call that you made to the non-emergency line. OK. You sound…well tell me what was going through your head at the time. > Zimmerman: Well, um, 2 or 3 weeks prior to that I’d seen somebody looking in the window of the house that he was in front of. > Serino: Was he white or black? > Zimmerman: Black. > Serino: OK. > Zimmerman: And the guy that lives there I know, he’s active in the neighborhood watch and he’s Caucasian. > Serino: OK. > Zimmerman: The guy, ah, the suspicious looking guy, went up to the house, I was walking my dog around the neighborhood, and he walked up to the house, and he was smoking. No, I’m sorry, he wasn’t smoking at that time. He turned around and he saw me walking my dog, so he lit a cigarette and leaned up against the wall, pretending like he lived there. > Serino: Mm hmm. > Zimmerman: And, ah, so I walked past him and I called non-emergency, and, ah, I got under a streetlight, and they asked me if I could see where he went, where he went inside the house and I said, no. And they said, can you get to where you can see and I said, I really don’t want to move closer. Um, oh, and they needed the address. And I don’t know why, adrenalin was rushing, a thousand things went through my mind. I gave them what I thought was my address > Serino: Um hm. > Zimmerman: further down, the 1900 building instead of the 1400. And, ah, when I walked to see the address, I saw the end of the house, and he was at the side of the house looking in the window. He either threw or spit his, he looked at me and threw or spit his cigarette out and then ran around the back. So I told non-emergency, I think it was still non-emergency at that time, that, you know I don’t know where you guys are coming from > Serino: Um hum. > Zimmerman: but he’s around back. And, ah, I don’t know where he went. And, um, I stayed in front of the house where the street light was. And I waited and I waited and I waited and then it hit me, the police came and drove past me. And then is when it hit me that I gave them what I thought was my address instead of that address. So I called back and I said, you know, um, the correct address. The police officer came back. I didn’t even see, cause the house was completely dark > Serino: Um hum. > Zimmerman: the window was open. So, and the front door was un, the police later told me that the front door was unlocked. All the windows were open in the house. And, ah, the front door was unlocked, the garage was open. Um, so they went in, they cleared the house. Oh, they asked me for the owner’s name and phone number. And then they asked me for permission to go inside the house, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Then the next week, not at that building but at the next building, on the end unit, the s, the guy I saw, broke in, apparently stole a laptop from what I understand. Ran off, but one of the maintenance guys saw him and was able to give the police a direction of where he was going… > Serino: Um hum. > Zimmerman: And he was actually arrested. Um, so when I saw him in the same area, in front of the guy’s house, that I know’s, that they keep it unsecured, and he was looking into the house. I just thought something doesn’t fit right here. > Serino: And this is, but this, but this is the one prior to this one, right? > Zimmerman: No, no, this is, I’m sorry, that’s why I felt he > Serino: OK > Zimmerman: was suspicious. > Serino: OK. OK. What did you see Trayvon doing that caught you as being suspicious? > Zimmerman: He was looking at the house intently and then… > Serino: What, the same house? > Zimmerman: The same house that, yeah, that I had called about before. Does all that match the kind of interviewer you describe as being an effective one? > [@Magiver](#): > > OK, you’re doing it again. You’ve just thrown your imagination of what happened on the wall to see if any of it sticks. You’ve accused Serino of incompetence without a single piece of information. You defined the standards of a good interviewer; I’ve just provided the evidence that Serino doesn’t fit that bill. Oh, and did you see his little cig-smoking burglar story that you was “WTF’ing?” about in an earlier post? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=364) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=366)