# 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:** 436
**Author:** ![Saraya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Saraya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saraya)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8703 "2012-12-04T15:44:33Z")
> [@Hbns](#): > > I doubt Martin “grabbed” Zimmerman’s head. Personally, I think the Zimmerman’s head hitting the ground was incidental to Martin shoving him to break Zimmerman’s grasp. Could have also been grabbing Zimmerman’s shirt(as opposed to his face) and shoving him up and down - possibly without the intent of hitting Zimmerman’s head on the pavement, but was a consequence none the less. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8704 "2012-12-04T15:45:54Z")
> [@Hbns](#): > > I am a bit skeptical that this works as well in reality as it does on tv, or that it is a process that is commonly applied outside of large crime labs. I welcome having my ignorance fought. > I would say exceedingly remote. > I doubt Martin “grabbed” Zimmerman’s head. Personally, I think the Zimmerman’s head hitting the ground was incidental to Martin shoving him to break Zimmerman’s grasp. To add to the confusion, the evidence sat in a locker for a month before being tested, giving DNA time to degrade. ---
**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:** [December 4, 2012, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8705 "2012-12-04T15:47:19Z")
> [@Hbns](#): > > I don’t know if I would go that far. The perspectives are completely different, making it a little difficult to compare equally. Even the full frontal pic of him at the station looks nothing like that car pic. Folks have jumped to the conclusion that the prosecution is cherry picking evidence by not including the color photo. But honestly, I suspect the last thing the defense wants is for the public to look too hard at these pics. ---
**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:** [December 4, 2012, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8706 "2012-12-04T15:50:26Z")
> [@Saraya](#): > > Could have also been grabbing Zimmerman’s shirt(as opposed to his face) and shoving him up and down - possibly without the intent of hitting Zimmerman’s head on the pavement, but was a consequence none the less. It’s also possible that Martin slammed his head using telekinetic powers. Since Zimmerman claims the kid grabbed his head and slammed it repeatedly into the sidewalk, entertaining alternative theories like telekinesis and shirt-shoves doesn’t really get us anywhere, now does it? ---
**Author:** ![betenoire39](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@betenoire39](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoire39)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8707 "2012-12-04T15:54:29Z")
> [@hmarvin](#): > > To add to the confusion, the evidence sat in a locker for a month before being tested, giving DNA time to degrade. Was Crump responsible for this? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Saraya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Saraya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saraya)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8708 "2012-12-04T15:59:52Z")
> [@hmarvin](#): > > To add to the confusion, the evidence sat in a locker for a month before being tested, giving DNA time to degrade. With the way the dogs were frothing at the mouth, you’d have thought they would tested sooner. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8709 "2012-12-04T16:00:10Z")
> [@betenoire39](#): > > Was Crump responsible for this? > > :rolleyes: Doubtful. When something is wet, mold and mildew can form and degrade DNA. It should have been tested earlier. Another problem you havee is that they gave Martin CPR, which they obviously should haver, but it adds contamination. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8710 "2012-12-04T16:22:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Material is not exculpatory merely because the defense says it is, and the failure to turn over exculpatory evidence is not necessarily grounds for a mistrial…especially when, as in the present case, the defense already knows what the evidence is. To expand slightly on this – there is no denial of due process rights when the prosecution does not provide material that is known to the defense and available to the defense by the exercise of due diligence (subpoena or deposition). Discovery is not a substitute for investigation. ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8711 "2012-12-04T16:26:43Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > **betenoir** is not an criminologist, so his opinion on these questions don’t matter. Do you seriously think the State can’t cough up an expert witness able to answer these questions satisfactorially to a jury? By taking the time to post in IMHO it would seem that Betenoire39 thinks their opinion matters. Or at least wants it known. I’m curious what their opinion is with regard to those likely responses. I made no comment with regard to what the state is or is not capable of. Interesting that you thought I did. > [@](#): > > It was drizzling; not a down pour. We have no reason to believe it was raining so hard his hands would have been rendered spotless. Since you are offering your opinion, do I take that to mean that you are a criminologist? Or should I simply suspect that your defence of Betenoire39 is self serving? > [@](#): > > Have you ever tried to wash off blood from your hands? It’s very hard to to do without soap, let alone a scrub brush and hydrogen peroxide. Often. I’ve found that snow and a rag work surprisingly well when I am in the field. Of course my expectations of cleanliness may differ from yours. > [@](#): > > The idea of drizzling rain being capable of washing away all detectable traces of blood from Martin’s hands will not fly in court. Especially if there is more than one menustrating woman in the jury box. We know the entire hand was tested? Regardless, I am sure it would not fly. Often points that don’t amount to much alone are brought up as part of a larger cumulative argument. I was just speculating. ---
**Author:** ![Saraya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Saraya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saraya)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8712 "2012-12-04T16:32:25Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > It’s also possible that Martin slammed his head using telekinetic powers. > > Since Zimmerman claims the kid grabbed his head and slammed it repeatedly into the sidewalk, entertaining alternative theories like telekinesis and shirt-shoves doesn’t really get us anywhere, now does it? Forgive us.., we were still playing the ‘George Zimmerman is a liar, evidence is irrelevant, he is a liar so burn him at the stake’ game. You’re right, it was wrong of me to make stuff up. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8713 "2012-12-04T17:09:24Z")
> [@Saraya](#): > > Forgive us.., we were still playing the ‘George Zimmerman is a liar, evidence is irrelevant, he is a liar so burn him at the stake’ game. > > You’re right, it was wrong of me to make stuff up. Incidentally, Crump’s response to the photo was that Trayvon was just defending himself, standing his ground,so Crump’s not denying the validity of the photo. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8714 "2012-12-04T17:11:18Z")
Incidentally, Crump’s response to the photo was that Trayvon was just standing his ground, having every right to be there, so Crump isn’t denying the validity of the photo. ---
**Author:** ![Saraya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Saraya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saraya)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8715 "2012-12-04T17:12:02Z")
> [@hmarvin](#): > > Incidentally, Crump’s response to the photo was that Trayvon was just defending himself, standing his ground,so Crump’s not denying the validity of the photo. I question whether he even noticed the difference in the nose, OR if he’s just not confident enough to query it’s validity. ---
**Author:** ![betenoire39](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@betenoire39](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoire39)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8716 "2012-12-04T17:45:06Z")
FYI, What does “validity of the photo” mean? That doesn’t mean Zimmerman wasn’t still in the wrong and shouldn’t be held accountable for setting the stage to the event. Furthermore, that doesn’t mean that other things happened that night which would further put nails in Zimmerman’s metaphorical coffin and case. I agree with Crump: Martin was defending himself against Zimmerman. If Martin gave him that injury, then that’s what it is–what struck me was how LITTLE damage Martin inflicted on Zimmerman. ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8717 "2012-12-04T18:22:28Z")
> [@betenoire39](#): > > FYI, What does “validity of the photo” mean? I don’t know. Maybe youwiththeface can respond to that as they are the one that called shenanigans. > [@](#): > > Furthermore, that doesn’t mean that other things happened that night which would further put nails in Zimmerman’s metaphorical coffin and case. Did you intend the case to also be metaphorical? 😃 > [@](#): > > –what struck me was how LITTLE damage Martin inflicted on Zimmerman. Relative to Zimmerman’s account? Or did you mean to imply that Martin should have been capable of much more physical violence? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8718 "2012-12-04T18:48:48Z")
> [@betenoire39](#): > > 1. If…then. If or if. > > If, if, if, if, if, if, if, if,if, if, if. Can you and some other unnamed posters stop using “if” every other sentence? I hope you realize that this just makes it appear that you really have nothing substantive to say…after all, a hypothetical is a hypothetical. > > 1. Why? Because maybe they seemed to be a little to comfortable around Zimmerman and his dad. Maybe because they didn’t deserve to be trusted. Again, at the time of the recording, this was Martin’s FAMILY ATTORNEY making a recording…I see NO REASON why at that time Crump needed to fork that over to the SPD. NONE. He was playing it smart. I wouldn’t have given that to them either. > > 2a. I would think so. > > 1. Only…love these pronouncements. > > 3a. That’s the wrong question to ask. No one is “hiding” anything. HAHAHA. If you only understood the use of the term “if”. “IF” is used to say that a particular thing can or will happen only after something else happens or becomes true. So the answer to your question is, “No”. If Crump refuses to turn over the original recording to the SPD or SA, then nothing on it can be presented in court. The recording won’t be considered as evidence by the court. Crump is hiding something from investigators. The recording he supplied doesn’t cover the time frame of the conversation and he refuses to supply the original recording. Crump is making it quite public that he doesn’t trust the SPD. If Crump doesn’t trust the SPD, what will the jury think about any evidence the police present against GZ? Crump is hurting his own case, if he has any, against the PD and GZ. Which is fine by me. Crump also claimed witness 8 was a minor (16) which affords her extra protections during depositions. Apparently witness 8 is an adult (18) and doesn’t get those extras. Deedee can always testify in court which means she can be cross-examined in court. That spectical should be worth the price of admission all by itself. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8719 "2012-12-04T18:56:35Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Crump also claimed witness 8 was a minor (16) which affords her extra protections during depositions. Apparently witness 8 is an adult (18) and doesn’t get those extras. Deedee can always testify in court which means she can be cross-examined in court. That spectical should be worth the price of admission all by itself. In what specific way do you believe the young woman’s testimony will be a “spectical [sic]?” ---
**Author:** ![betenoire39](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@betenoire39](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoire39)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8720 "2012-12-04T19:01:46Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In what specific way do you believe the young woman’s testimony will be a “spectical [sic]?” LOL. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8721 "2012-12-04T19:06:06Z")
> [@betenoire39](#): > > **FYI, What does** “validity of the photo” mean? > > That doesn’t mean Zimmerman wasn’t still in the wrong and shouldn’t be held accountable for setting the stage to the event. > > Furthermore, that doesn’t mean that other things happened that night which would further put nails in Zimmerman’s metaphorical coffin and case. > > I agree with Crump: Martin was defending himself against Zimmerman. If Martin gave him that injury, then that’s what it is–what struck me was how LITTLE damage Martin inflicted on Zimmerman. FYI ??? What does validity mean ??? Is the photo valid? Has the photo been photoshopped? Were the first two photos an attempt to lessen or weaken the defense’s claim that GZ was, in fact, attacked.? If you, or Crump, or the prosecution believe that something else happened that night, all you have to do is prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, in court, that something else happened that night or that GZ’s version could not have happened. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2012, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/8722 "2012-12-04T19:07:34Z")
Let me get this straight - the anti-Zimmerman crowd is, in all seriousness, arguing that the Sanford police department photoshopped the picture they took of Zimmerman before placing it into evidence? Really? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=435) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=437)