# 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:** 598
**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 9, 2013, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11944 "2013-07-09T11:44:28Z")
> [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > TM threw the first punch according to GZ only. And your evidence that he’s incorrect is what, exactly? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11945 "2013-07-09T11:57:35Z")
And secondly, who is the jury going to believe threw the first punch? Did Zimmerman have any logical reason to chase down a bigger, younger guy, and punch him? Or would a young kid already used to getting in fights at school and pissed off about being followed throw the first punch? We already know that Martin was profiling Zimmerman, not vice versa, and the prosecution’s star witness testified that racism is rampant in her community. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11946 "2013-07-09T12:56:56Z")
> [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > TM threw the first punch according to GZ only. According to the physical evidence, Martin threw the _only_ punch. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Tollhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e99b99/32.png) [@Tollhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tollhouse)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11947 "2013-07-09T13:11:58Z")
> [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > TM threw the first punch according to GZ only. You mean…you dont beleeeeve the gunman? :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11948 "2013-07-09T13:21:20Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > I said that on a show recently, one of the hosts asked Taaffe why he seemed to be gzs only friend, and asked taaffe where all his other family or friends are to speak on his behalf. The only person I have seen speaking out and praising gz has been taaffe. Perhaps they managed to dig up a couple other people who know him for the trial, but taaffe is by far his main supporter and who sings his praises Still waiting for an answer. I have posted several links showing other people who were Zimmerman’s friends. These date from March 2012. You haven’t posted a single link so much as confirming your own (claimed) recollection. So: where’s your evidence that Taafe was Zimmerman’s only friend? ---
**Author:** ![Tollhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e99b99/32.png) [@Tollhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tollhouse)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11949 "2013-07-09T13:28:50Z")
I answered above…another poster added something pretty interesting re Gzs ‘friends’ above. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11950 "2013-07-09T13:29:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Still waiting for an answer. I have posted several links showing other people who were Zimmerman’s friends. These date from March 2012. You haven’t posted a single link so much as confirming your own (claimed) recollection. > > So: where’s your evidence that Taafe was Zimmerman’s only friend? > [@Tollhouse](#): > > I answered above…another poster added something pretty interesting re Gzs ‘friends’ above. In what post number did you “answer above?” ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11951 "2013-07-09T13:43:41Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Sure, it’s possible. But it’s not really a great idea to look at each issue in isolation… Actually, yes, it is. You need to see if every piece of your theory of the crime fits the evidence, that’s how you can tell if it is plausible or not. Standing back and speaking in vague generalities is much easier, but it has no value. > [@Stoid](#): > > A much more likely scenario is that the person doing the screaming got a bullet to the chest. Why is that much more likely? > [@Stoid](#): > > Besides, why would Zimmerman continue to screen? Which brings me to much more interesting Zimmerman tales: He claims that he did not think he had hit Martin. Really? He’s a foot in front of you sitting on top of you, you take aim and fire into his chest, and you don’t think you hit him? > > If you didn’t think you hit him, why did you think he set up and said “you got me”? > If you didn’t think you hit him, why did you think he rolled over onto his face? > If you didn’t think you hit him, why did you think he stopped hitting you? In the walkthrough, he suggests that Martin was surrendering because Zimmerman had produced (and fired) the gun. Makes sense to me. I’ve never shot anyone in the chest, I don’t know how they’d react. Do you? I doubt movies and TV shows have it right. And we’re talking about a chaotic fight here. There’s nothing rational or clear-headed about it. > [@Stoid](#): > > So, this is where Zimmerman gets tangled in his own lies:: the reality is very close, what he really didn’t think he had succeeded in doing, was _killing_ him. And he needed to kill him, because he needed not to be arguing with anyone else about what he had really done that night. But if he had told the real truth, and said “I didn’t think I had killed him”, then what would have been his explanation for climbing on to the mortally wounded boys back? That’s an awfully aggressive, dangerous, stupid, insensitive thing to do to somebody who has a hole in their chest, don’t you think? How could he possibly excuse that level of egregious disregard for Trayvon Martin’s health? Much less damning is a claim that he did not believe he had hit Martin at all, which gives him the excuse for climbing onto his back: to restrain him and search him. But the real reason he probably climbed onto Martin’s back was to \*make sure \*he was dead. So, he needs to kill him. He’s holding a 9mm pistol with 6 rounds left in it. But the method he uses to make sure Martin’s dead is to…climb on his back? How does that work? How does that make sure Martin is dead? > [@Stoid](#): > > Whether you accept my theory about why he did the things we know for sure he did or not, unless you believe that Zimmerman is simply intellectually defective, his many statements about what supposedly occurred and what he did and why simply do not make any rational sense. Which is to be expected. In the Battle of Cape Esperance, the U.S. fleet shelled their own vessel, the _Farenholt_, even though she’d just signalled her location. Were the other sailors shelling it on purpose, or is combat a stressful environment where irrational actions are commonplace? > [@Stoid](#): > > By the way: according to GZ, he was no longer in any fear of serious injury nor death when he killed Trayvon. That in fact, GZ had removed all threats of injury and death. Based on his story, he had removed his head off the sidewalk thereby preventing further injury to his head. > > Also based on his story, he removed Trayvon’s hand off his nose by using a wrist lock. Also based on his story, when he unholstered his gun to shoot Trayvon, he had Trayvon’s arm pinned. > > So why was his only option to put a bullet in the 17-year-old’s chest? Why didn’t he simply use these skills to stop Martin earlier? Or why didn’t he simply continue preventing Martin from hitting him, knowing the police would be there any minute? Why didn’t he choose to speak at that moment and say any one of a hundred things that might have given Martin pause? Perhaps because Martin was screaming hysterically in his face? Or if you believe Zimmerman he was screaming hysterically while pinning Martin and reaching for his gun… Seriously? \*\*\*Seriously? \*\*\*You guys really truly honestly in your heart of all hearts believe this _ludicrous_ story? It doesn’t matter whether that was his only option or not. I realize that you have serious issues with self-defense law, but that’s what Zimmerman is to be judged under: the law as written, not your personal code of conduct. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11952 "2013-07-09T13:47:14Z")
Does Florida law require that a finding (of 2nd degree murder) requires forethought? Why didn’t the prosecution try for a manslaughter conviction? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11953 "2013-07-09T13:58:23Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > And yet, Zimmerman says he still heard Martin utter his bad-guy death speech ‘you got me’ well enough. Just a wild-ass guess here, but one would think that having a bullet pierce your lung and lodge in your heart probably prevents one from talking real loud… That is a wild-ass guess, you’re right. Maybe Martin said it, maybe he made some kind of sound that Zimmerman misinterpreted, maybe he said nothing. I don’t know which it was, and neither do you. > [@DragonAsh](#): > > (and how did Zimmerman hear Martin say ‘you’re going to die tonight motherfucker’ if he was screaming for help the whole time?) …by hearing it? I don’t understand. You can hear more than one sound at a time. > [@DragonAsh](#): > > Far from being ‘shocked and un-nerved’, Zimmerman - who, remember, says he didn’t think his shot hit Martin - was alert and quick-thinking enough that he immediately stopped screaming, got up, jumped on top of Martin - five seconds ago, he was scared for his very life that this same guy was going to kill him - and says he moved Martin’s his hands away from his body ‘because he felt like Martin had something in his hands’. > > Now, the plural of anecdote is not data, but: I’ve been afraid for my life in a hostile situation only once in my life, and I didn’t go from practically crapping my pants and afraid for my life, to regular ol’ quick-thinking me in the span of a few seconds, even after I was 100% sure the threat was over. And Zimmerman did not know the threat was over, according to his own statement (‘I didn’t think my shot hit him!’). I doubt any un-trained civilian would go from ‘shit I’m going to die’ to ‘ok all cool now better make sure this guy doesn’t have a rock in his hands’ in the span of three seconds. > > Far from being dazed and confused from a beating and a really loud gun shot, Zimmerman, according to his own statements, acted with remarkable quickness and alertness. Can’t have it both ways - either he’s lying about his actions, or he did not have a reasonable fear of death or grave bodily injury. How immediately did he jump on Martin? No witnesses saw that part, so we don’t know. Zimmerman can guess it was a couple seconds, but I don’t trust his recall of time in that situation. Also, given Zimmerman’s account of the man with the flashlight not matching the witness’ recall, it seems that Zimmerman wasn’t right back to regular ol’ quick-thinking him, he was still muddled enough to get details (of no consequence to his guilt or innocence) wrong. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11954 "2013-07-09T14:11:00Z")
What some people still don’t grasp is why Trayvon took off running. If he was under the mail thing, as DD claimed, he wasn’t being followed. Since it can be proven from the dispatcher call that Zimmerman was parked during the dispatcher call, he wasn’t following anyone. The only evidence that can be considered is that Trayvon approached Zimmerman’s truck and saw Zimmerman on the telephone. Now, why would anyone take off running because someone was on the telephone? Trayvon certainly wasn’t scared if he approached the vehicle. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11955 "2013-07-09T14:11:25Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Also, depends on how you define “aggressor” and there’s also no physical evidence that Trayvon was the aggressor. Aggressor means the person who initiated the conflict. Setting aside the fact that Zimmerman was the aggressor by following Martin, there is no physical evidence to prove which person did anything physical to initiate the altercation between them. None. None to prove either one was the aggressor. Zero. > > We do have a little bit of witness testimony suggesting that it was Zimmerman from what she heard on the phone, but not very reliable. And that’s it. > > Nothing else. > > Any determination of who acted first has to be a process of reasoning, could lead to either, and may still leave an intelligent and thoughtful person without a strong belief either way. When there’s no evidence either way, the only reasonable conclusion is “not guilty”. You can’t prove something beyond a reasonable doubt through speculation. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11956 "2013-07-09T14:13:54Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Why didn’t the prosecution try for a manslaughter conviction? The prosecution charged Zimmerman (IMO) with second-degree murder to pressure him into accepting a plea agreement for manslaughter. They were attempting to keep this pressure on him right up to the point where the trial began. Then it was too late to change the charge. Currently it appears that the prosecution recognizes that they have almost no chance of a conviction on second-degree murder, and are hoping the judge will allow the jury to convict on manslaughter, if they convict at all. I believe **Bricker** has posted that the judege may not include instructions about manslaughter in his jury instructions without the consent of the defense, except if the judge rules that such instructions do not compromise the defense’s ability to defend Zimmerman. Were I the defense, I would fight tooth and nail against any suggestion of manslaughter. The defense is on a roll - I see no reason why they should compromise at this point. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11957 "2013-07-09T14:17:35Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Does Florida law require that a finding (of 2nd degree murder) requires forethought? [No, only first-degree murder does:](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html) > [@](#): > > (1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being: > 1. When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being; > > 2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any: > > [long list of felonies]; or > > 3. Which resulted from the unlawful distribution of any substance controlled under s. 893.03(1), cocaine as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., opium or any synthetic or natural salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium, or methadone by a person 18 years of age or older, when such drug is proven to be the proximate cause of the death of the user, > > is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082. > [@](#): > > (2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. > [@ralph124c](#): > > Why didn’t the prosecution try for a manslaughter conviction? Unclear, though it may be available as an option for the jury. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11958 "2013-07-09T14:17:56Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > Magiver, I cannot argue with craziness…the things you are stating are all the opposite of what occured. Trayvon was a highschool kid, walking home in his neighborhood, he had a dammed bag of skittles. He was as we now know not engaged in anything criminal or suspicious, he was walking. Gz followed him without identifying himself as neighborhood watch, Trayvon is in a coffin, gz got a couple superficial ouchies. The only suspucious activity was that of gz. Under no circumstances should GZ have approached Martin. PERIOD. The correct course of action was to call the police and keep his distance. This is what he did. Martin did the exact opposite of this. He approached him TWICE. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11959 "2013-07-09T14:27:45Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Also, depends on how you define “aggressor” and there’s also no physical evidence that Trayvon was the aggressor. Aggressor means the person who initiated the conflict. Setting aside the fact that Zimmerman was the aggressor by following Martin, there is no physical evidence to prove which person did anything physical to initiate the altercation between them. None. None to prove either one was the aggressor. Zero. > > We do have a little bit of witness testimony suggesting that it was Zimmerman from what she heard on the phone, but not very reliable. And that’s it. > > Nothing else. > > Any determination of who acted first has to be a process of reasoning, could lead to either, and may still leave an intelligent and thoughtful person without a strong belief either way. Yes we have evidence that Martin was the aggressor. We have the testimony of Zimmerman. We have the evidence of his injuries including a photograph of a swollen and bleeding nose which is consistent with his account. There are no indications Martin was struck. So if there are no indications that Martin was struck and solid proof Zimmerman was struck then the evidence of his account stands. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11960 "2013-07-09T14:34:18Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > Door hinge, what do you mean, what do I mean? Im aware there were some burglaries there, my question was specifically about TM, as we now all know, he wasnt engaged in anything more suspicious than being a high school kid walking in his neighborhood. He had a bag of skittles in his pocket. Gz was the suspicious one, and as it turns out, after he so eagerly volunteered to patrol around in his car, a boy with nothing more than a bag of candy in his pocket ends up dead and gz has a couple very minor injuries, the superficial cut on his head didnt even require a bandaid. The only suspicious person prowling around that day was gz The wounds were not superficial, he was bleeding front to back with a swollen nose and the back of his head was covered in abrasions. And I don’t know what rock you live under but you can clearly see the bandages in the video. On top of that it’s possible to injure someone’s head without showing a scratch. The shock involved in a head strike is a serious threat to one’s life. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11961 "2013-07-09T14:38:44Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > That is certainly excellent proof. > > So should I take that to mean that an audio visual media capture of facts different than those put forth in the lie is the only thing you will accept as sufficiently compelling to be considered proof of the lie? Or will you also accept other kinds of evidence as well? And if so, can you say what they are? > > And in the same vein, do you have different standards of proof for different kinds of things? In other words, will you only accept that a person has been proven to have told a lie by an audio visual recording, but to prove something else, something unrelated to proving or disproving someone’s truthfulness, you will accept different kinds of evidence? > > Again, I am asking these questions with complete sincerity because I am trying to understand your point of view. > > Thank you. No, audio/visual evidence is not the only method of proving a lie. Evidential proof is something that eliminates all other possibilities. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11962 "2013-07-09T14:39:49Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I believe **Bricker** has posted that the judege may not include instructions about manslaughter in his jury instructions without the consent of the defense, except if the judge rules that such instructions do not compromise the defense’s ability to defend Zimmerman. Were I the defense, I would fight tooth and nail against any suggestion of manslaughter. The defense is on a roll - I see no reason why they should compromise at this point. As it happens, though, the defense consented to a manslaughter instruction when they moved for a directed verdict at the close of the prosecution case. O’Mara argued that the judge should at least dismiss second degree murder but let the jury consider manslaughter. ---
**Author:** ![Tollhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e99b99/32.png) [@Tollhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tollhouse)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2013, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/11963 "2013-07-09T14:55:32Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The wounds were not superficial, he was bleeding front to back with a swollen nose and the back of his head was covered in abrasions. And I don’t know what rock you live under but you can clearly see the bandages in the video. On top of that it’s possible to injure someone’s head without showing a scratch. The shock involved in a head strike is a serious threat to one’s life. They were as discussed on numerous news programs, nothing more than superficial cuts. While its true there are some types of head injuries that dont result in external scratches, this would not be the case for the type of injury gz claims. its pretty hard to have your head bashed into concrete repeatedly without major damage, yet amazingly gz did…someone who had their head bashed into concrete, he didnt sustain deep gashes requiring any stitches, skull fractures, concussion, head trauma or brain damage. But he whined about a couple superficial ouchies. I can see why his ex had to get a protective order against him [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=597) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=599)