# 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:** 577
**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:** [June 30, 2013, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11524 "2013-06-30T22:38:43Z")
Trying to make hay out of the size thing is hilarious. West wasted time and oxygen trying make their size differential a point of ambiguity so that the jury could disregard the claim that Zimmerman was on top. That was unsuccessful, though, because one witnesses explicitly indicated the man who was on top when the gun went off was the one who got up and stood over the body. Thus making the “Martin is bigger than Zimmerman” debate completely moot. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2013, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11525 "2013-06-30T22:47:27Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > That was unsuccessful, though, because one witnesses explicitly indicated the man who was on top when the gun went off was the one who got up and stood over the body. Again, that’s the same witness that swears up and down that Zimmerman shot Martin in the back. No credibility whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2013, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11526 "2013-06-30T23:27:37Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Sigh. Please learn to read what’s actually written. It would be illegal for them to convict if they had reasonable doubt that he is guilty. Your claim that the only valid inference is that, when the witness said “bigger” he meant “fatter”, not “taller” is false. Wait, isn’t this 10th grade physics? How big someone is a function of their _mass_. Zimmerman had more mass than Trayvon, therefore, he was bigger. Next, you’ll try to convince me that [Colin Kaepernick](http://malecelebbio.com/2013/03/18/colin-kaepernick/colin-kaepernick-07/) is bigger than [Chris Christie](http://wac.9ebf.edgecastcdn.net/809EBF/ec-origin.philly.barstoolsports.com/files/2012/02/fat-christie.jpg), because Mr. Kaepernick is “taller”. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2013, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11527 "2013-06-30T23:32:27Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > Wait, isn’t this 10th grade physics? How big someone is a function of their _mass_. Stupidity. How big someone is “perceived” (which is what we’re talking about here) is not a direct function of their mass. Otherwise a 1 cubic inch of gold would be “bigger” than 20 cubic inches of wood. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11528 "2013-07-01T00:02:37Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Again, that’s the same witness that swears up and down that Zimmerman shot Martin in the back. No credibility whatsoever. Well yes, the coroner’s report and the physical reality shows that he was shot in the chest, but what if we all got together and clapped our hands and believed hard enough that he was shot in the back? Isn’t that the real evidence? That seems to be on par with the “it doesn’t matter that his actual height difference with the clerk was the diameter of a quarter, if you look at the video you can just FEEL that he was a giant borne from the bowels of Orthanc ready to swallow the clerk whole as a snack” reasoning, so in your world the witness is super credible! ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11529 "2013-07-01T00:06:58Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > Well yes, the coroner’s report and the physical reality shows that he was shot in the chest, but what if we all got together and clapped our hands and believed hard enough that he was shot in the back? Isn’t that the real evidence? You’re describing the Trayvonistas’ modus operandi. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11530 "2013-07-01T00:44:40Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Stupidity. How big someone is “perceived” (which is what we’re talking about here) is not a direct function of their mass. Otherwise a 1 cubic inch of gold would be “bigger” than 20 cubic inches of wood. Perceived? What do you mean perceived? How big someone is a function of someone’s mass. Period. It’d be like saying Kaepernick is bigger than Chris Christie, because Kaepernick is 6’5 and Chris Christie is not. He may be taller but “tall” is not a function of mass, weight, or how big something or someone is. It is simply a descriptor. Using it to describe someone’s mass or weight (which are really the same thing) is meaningless. If you wish to describe how big something is, you describe it’s mass first and dimensions second. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11531 "2013-07-01T01:21:04Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Again, you are a man of very passionate beliefs, and I am certain that they bring you great peace. That’s all that really matters for those of us who have no part in it, so it’s all good. I’m a person of dispassionate logic. Wouldn’t bother me a bit if Zimmerman is convicted based on new evidence. I don’t care either way. Again, the Prosecution trainwreck was predicted based on the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11532 "2013-07-01T01:24:59Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > **Bricker** told you, repeatedly, with citations, that Florida precedent establishes that a punch to the nose is enough to establish reasonable fear for the purposes of self-defense. You keep ignoring him. This is incorrect. Florida case law establishes that a jury _may_ find a punch to be the kind of serious bodily harm that licenses deadly force in self-defense. It does not obligate the jury so to find. A jury may find that a punch occurred (or was imminently about to occur), but that notwithstanding, there was no threat of serious bodily harm which would permit deadly force. The question as to whether serious bodily harm was imminent is a question of fact reserved for the jury. **Bricker** ’s case establishes that a court may not conclude that a punch is non-serious bodily harm as a matter of law (and thereby take that question away from the jury). (For the record, I don’t think **Bricker** has portrayed the case as holding anything different.) ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11533 "2013-07-01T02:28:57Z")
On a second reading, that might be all you were suggesting. But it is probably worthwhile to note that just showing a punch will not move the needle much, the jury will then need to find that the punch represented SBH. (Of course, it will be closer to showing SBH than not showing that there was a punch.) ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11534 "2013-07-01T03:13:45Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > On a second reading, that might be all you were suggesting. But it is probably worthwhile to note that just showing a punch will not move the needle much, the jury will then need to find that the punch represented SBH. (Of course, it will be closer to showing SBH than not showing that there was a punch.) Considering that people have been known to die from one punch to the nose or one punch to the face (one such incident happened just a month or two ago), it is not that fantastical to consider a punch to the face a threat of “SBH”. ---
**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 1, 2013, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11535 "2013-07-01T03:29:21Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Considering that people have been known to die from one punch to the nose or one punch to the face (one such incident happened just a month or two ago), it is not that fantastical to consider a punch to the face a threat of “SBH”. You’re not listening. \*\*Kimmy \*\* said, it can be considered SBH. But is doesn’t have to be, and a jury can find otherwise depending on the circumstances. It is not a slam dunk. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11536 "2013-07-01T03:32:09Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Considering that people have been known to die from one punch to the nose or one punch to the face (one such incident happened just a month or two ago), it is not that fantastical to consider a punch to the face a threat of “SBH”. The jury will not be asked to consider whether _some_ possible, hypothetical punch could cause serious bodily harm (I don’t know why you its initials in scare quotes, that is the way the standard is phrased). The jury will be asked whether _this_ actual punch, with the host of circumstances in which it occurred, augured SBH. This is an exercise in fact-finding, not a general theory of punches. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11537 "2013-07-01T03:37:38Z")
Post edit window: The jury will come to its conclusions on the basis of the evidence and testimony at trial and the application of their general, everyday experience (a punch delivered by a person with these characteristics K in some specific situation S might be nothing (an old lady punching you in the upper arm); a punch by someone burlier might be painful, but not life-threatening; a punch by a professional boxer or to a particularly vulnerable anatomical site (the windpipe, for instance) might do serious danger) supplemented, if need be, by any expert testimony. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11538 "2013-07-01T04:00:27Z")
And of course, we know that this punch, at best, barely broke the nose, and the circumstances under which it was thrown are totally unclear, since Zimmerman’s story of being punched in the face “25 to 30 times” is obviously nonsense. So whether the jury believes Zimmerman had a reasonable fear for his life is going to come down to, surprise surprise, Zimmerman’s credibility, not the fact that his nose was bloodied devoid of any context. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11539 "2013-07-01T04:04:31Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > You’re not listening. \*\*Kimmy \*\* said, it can be considered SBH. But is doesn’t have to be, and a jury can find otherwise depending on the circumstances. It is not a slam dunk. And yet Trayvonistas keep telling us that Zimmerman’s injuries are apparently not enough to warrant self-defense. Which is wrong - they can definitely be enough. ---
**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:** [July 1, 2013, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11540 "2013-07-01T04:05:28Z")
It’s going to come down to whether the prosecution can prove he wasn’t in reasonable fear. Showing Zimmerman to be not credible will be necessary for that, but hardly sufficient. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11541 "2013-07-01T04:07:33Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > The jury will not be asked to consider whether _some_ possible, hypothetical punch could cause serious bodily harm (I don’t know why you its initials in scare quotes, that is the way the standard is phrased). The jury will be asked whether _this_ actual punch, with the host of circumstances in which it occurred, augured SBH. This is an exercise in fact-finding, not a general theory of punches. When you’re punched in the face, and are still being attacked, and it is known that people have died from just one punch to the face, it is pretty logical that there is no need for additional great injury to feel your life is threatened. In fact, one can possibly feel reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury without any injuries inflicted on one at all. ---
**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:** [July 1, 2013, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11542 "2013-07-01T04:09:07Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > And yet Trayvonistas keep telling us that Zimmerman’s injuries are apparently not enough to warrant self-defense. Which is wrong - they can definitely be enough. As well as ignoring that Zimmerman has never claimed he shot him because his nose was broken, or because he was being punched and his head bashed against the ground. People have simply observed that it is reasonable to think, observing his injuries, that he may have been entitled to do so. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11543 "2013-07-01T04:15:03Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > This is incorrect. **Florida case law establishes that a jury _may_ find a punch to be the kind of serious bodily harm that licenses deadly force in self-defense. It does not obligate the jury so to find. A jury may find that a punch occurred (or was imminently about to occur), but that notwithstanding, there was no threat of serious bodily harm which would permit deadly force.** > > The question as to whether serious bodily harm was imminent is a question of fact reserved for the jury. **Bricker** ’s case establishes that a court may not conclude that a punch is non-serious bodily harm as a matter of law (and thereby take that question away from the jury). > > (For the record, I don’t think **Bricker** has portrayed the case as holding anything different.) (Bolding added) That sounds right. If the jury believes that banging someones head on the ground and punching them in the face can cause SBH, or even death, if it’s not stopped, then the jury should find that the use of lethal force was warranted to stop the beating/banging/punching. In the 2010 Greyston Garcia SYG case, the Florida judge found that the video of Pedro Roteta’s swinging a bag of car radios at the head of Garcia showed “imminent danger”. (A doctor agreed that if Garcia had been hit with the radios it could have resulted in SBH.) Garcia had responded by stabbing and killing Roteta. The judge ordered the charges dropped against Garcia. In Florida. In Florida, are the injuries to GZ face and head sufficent evidence to convince some/all of the jury that GZ could have reasonably believed that his life was in “imminent danger”? The witnesses are proving that none of them were willing to physically attempt to stop the fight. A beating is taking place, GZ can’t get away, no one will help = imminent danger. Add the struggle for the firearm. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=576) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=578)