# 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:** 92
**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:** [May 21, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1822 "2012-05-21T17:18:23Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > We are not talking about a single punch. Did you know that? > > Regards, > Shodan Again, the only who says there were multiple punches and head bashing is Z. Its not a foregone conclusion that the physical evidence backs up his dramatic version of events, either. Martin had one cut on one finger; that is consistent with a single punch, not multiple ones. The prosecution may very well be able to show that Zimmerman’s injuries could have been caused by a single punch, and that his injuries do not fit the pattern expected if his head had been bashed against the sidewalk repeatedly. If the jury doesnt consider Z’s statement as credible, that means they will have to go by other evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Poochey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@Poochey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Poochey)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1823 "2012-05-21T17:22:08Z")
> [@Larry\_Mudd](#): > > There is the statement of the girl who was on the phone with Martin at the time, who will say that she heard Martin say “Get off! Get off!” before the call ended. > > This indicates that the struggle began with Zimmerman putting his hands on Martin, which is not surprising, since immediately before this Zimmerman had expressed dismay at the thought of him getting away. > > The jury will be faced with two substantially different narratives. In one, Zimmerman is defending against a sudden and unprovoked attack, and in another he has initiated a physical confrontation which ends with a homicide. > > To believe the self defense claim, you have to believe that a young man with no history of violence, objecting to unwanted scrutiny, doubled back and launched into a berserker assault steps away from his host’s doorstep, _while still on the phone with his girlfriend._ > > Alternately, the struggle took place because Zimmerman overstepped his rights and tried to keep Martin on the spot until the police arrived, and Martin reacted because he thought he was being stalked by a John Wayne Gacy type. _This_ makes sense in the context of the phone call - with regard to both what the girlfriend has said regarding his state of mind, and also to the fact that he was \*on the phone at all \*when the struggle took place. > > There _is_ evidence that suggests the confrontation started with Zimmerman unlawfully putting his hands on Martin. You might protest that it’s not the best evidence we could hope for (and I am certainly inclined to agree,) but the only evidence we have to suggest otherwise is Zimmerman’s own statement. Does the narrative he describes provide a _reasonable_ doubt? That’s the what the big show is going to be about, isn’t it? Zimmerman was also on the phone to the 911 dispatcher, almost right up to the confrontation. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1824 "2012-05-21T17:33:04Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Again, the only who says there were multiple punches and head bashing is Z. Do you have a cite where Zimmerman claimed multiple punches? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1825 "2012-05-21T17:55:11Z")
> [@Poochey](#): > > Zimmerman was also on the phone to the 911 dispatcher, almost right up to the confrontation. And? This evidence _also_ supports the narrative that Zimmerman pursued Martin. The dispatcher says he’ll tell the officers to meet him near the mailboxes (closest given landmark to Zimmerman’s current location at the time,) and Zimmerman indicated that he planned to be somewhere else. (“Actually, can you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at?”) The problem with _Martin’s_ phone call is that it is very hard to explain in the context of Zimmerman’s account of what happened. The call is logged as ending at 7:16. (Cell log only has by-minute granularity, so this means during the minute between 7:16 and 7:17.) The first 911 call came in at 7:16:10. We know that the call was interrupted by the scuffle. Zimmerman’s account of events is very hard to reconcile with this fact. You don’t start a fist fight in the middle of a phone conversation, that’s banana oil. ---
**Author:** ![michigan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e7dd6/32.png) [@michigan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/michigan)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1826 "2012-05-21T18:00:31Z")
@joel, But I did look up the lyrics to the song before I posted it, to make sure it contained the lyrics I thought it did. @Larry, I agree it may not be relevant to the trial, but people were arguing about it here! ---
**Author:** ![michigan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e7dd6/32.png) [@michigan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/michigan)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1827 "2012-05-21T18:07:14Z")
The state really does have the entire burden of proving its charges at a trial. GZ doesn’t have to say anything, submit any evidence – nothing – and the jury will be instructed that they may not interpret his silence or his refusal to mount a defense as evidence of guilt. They may only consider whether the evidence brought forward by the state proves the charges beyond the shadow of a doubt. The testimony of the girl that records show talked to Martin just before he was killed are potentially evidence that GZ initiated the physical confrontation. Her statements also contain evidence that GZ acted with malice. To convict GZ of the charges the state has brought, it isn’t enough for the state to prove that GZ started the fight or wasn’t in fear of his life. The state also needs to prove he acted out of malice. Evidence of a single punch or even more than one punch may not persuade jurors that most people would have felt sufficiently threatened to use deadly force that evening. On the other hand, like I said before, the punches may be irrelevant if people believe Martin reached for the gun and/or uttered frightening verbal threats. ---
**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:** [May 21, 2012, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1828 "2012-05-21T18:09:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Do you have a cite where Zimmerman claimed multiple punches? > > Regards, > Shodan Not “multiple punches” per se, but plenty of reports that he had his head beaten in against the sidewalk following a punch to the face. Even the cops who declined to arrest the guy don’t believe his injuries match up with story. You can disregard this is you want to, but it will be brought up in trial. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1829 "2012-05-21T18:09:29Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > On another note, there’s been a lot of speculation in this thread about the content of GZ’s text messages. But it should be kept in mind that the state investigator conceded at the bond hearing that they had no evidence as to who initiated the altercation. So whatever is in those text messages, it’s likely not anything that sheds any light on this angle. Maybe so, but if you recall, that investigator also said he didn’t know about Zimmerman’s medical records when queried by O’Mara, yet according to the document dump, Detective Serino obtained and filed that report in March. What one investigator claims knowledge of is not necessarily the sum knowledge of the prosecution’s team. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1830 "2012-05-21T18:17:31Z")
> [@michigan](#): > > Her statements also contain evidence that GZ acted with malice. Can you point out exactly which statements of hers contain that evidence? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1831 "2012-05-21T18:27:17Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > What is the relevance of the lyrics of that song? The reference to the song title was just to say that the phrase “I am begging you” exists in pop culture and is therefore not unreasonable for someone to have said that phrase. That’s it. Are you claiming that the phrase “I am begging you” does not exist anywhere in pop culture that Martin could not have ever heard it? That this phrase would be completely foreign to him? If not, then what are you arguing here? I’m not getting it. Why would they need to admit anything? What is the nature of the screw up that you are referring to? I guess I just don’t understand the significance of your objection here. > > The lyrics of this particular song have nothing to do with anything and are completely and utterly immaterial to this discussion. So what are you trying to get them to admit exactly? The phrase “I am begging you” exists in pop culture and is a fairly common set of words. I don’t understand the incredulity here, and I really don’t understand what it is that you think you are arguing or that you are expecting him to admit here. That the term “I begging you” exists in the context of requesting a hand job, which is the context that a teenager would be familiar with. Do you have a popular reference to it being used to request not being killed? Since it isn’t likely that Martin was requesting that Zimmerman jerk him off. Please use references prior to Feb. 26. We already Robert Zimmerman using a line from a TV show that wasn’t shown until March. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1832 "2012-05-21T18:47:25Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Even the cops who declined to arrest the guy don’t believe his injuries match up with story. Do you have a cite from the cops who declined to arrest him wherein they state that his injuries do not match his story? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1833 "2012-05-21T18:48:02Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The last 40 second before Martin was shot doesn’t suggest that Z was getting his head bashed in or suffocated, if indeed he was the voice on the tape yelling for help. So what about that? Even if Martin attacked Z initially, if Martin back down and was not fighting, does this still allow Z to shoot him in the chest? > > These are questions that the jury will have to answer. It’s not going to be as simple as “Martin hit Zimmerman, so its legal for Z to shoot the kid dead”. If Martin punched Zimmerman and then turned and walked away. then Zimmerman had no right to shoot Martin. Of course the Forensic evidence indicates that didn’t happen. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1834 "2012-05-21T19:03:14Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > That the term “I begging you” exists in the context of requesting a hand job, which is the context that a teenager would be familiar with. Do you have a popular reference to it being used to request not being killed? Since it isn’t likely that Martin was requesting that Zimmerman jerk him off. > > Please use references prior to Feb. 26. We already Robert Zimmerman using a line from a TV show that wasn’t shown until March. Are you freaking serious? I have to prove to you that a 17 year old would be aware of the existence of the words “I”, “am”, “begging” and “you”, and that he would have the linguistic ability to use them together in a sentence? You need some sort of proof of this before you can accept it? Seriously? Out of curiosity, what sort of evidence would you accept on this point? What on earth would move your opinion on this short of a video of Martin using these exact words in this particular order? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1835 "2012-05-21T19:05:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > A judge who sees that the prosecution has not offered any evidence that would prove he’s a liar cannot even let the jury decide. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Can you elaborate on what you mean in that last sentence? What happens if that is the case? Yes. At the close of the prosecution’s case-in-chief, the defense will make a motion to strike the prosecution’s evidence for insufficiency. This is often a rote motion, done to preserve for appeal the claim of insufficiency of evidence. But it can be quite substantive. In simpler terms, the order of trial is that the prosecution begins the trial. They have the burden of proof – they must convince the jury. When the prosecution “rests,” it means that they have finished the process of providing evidence to the jury. The defense has cross-examined prosecution witnesses at this point but has not put on any witnesses or evidence of their own. At this point, the defense will ask the judge to rule that the prosecution failed to meet its burden… in other words, that even if the jury believed every fact that the prosecution introduced as evidence, and even if the jury were to make every permissible inference from those facts, it wouldn’t be enough to reach the standard of _beyond a reasonable doubt_. The prosecution can’t just ask jurors to connect the dots, in other words, past a certain point. They must have evidence that allows the jury to find that each and every element of the offense is proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, the elements of self-defense must also be DISproved beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge can decide that, as a matter of law, no reasonable jury could convict on the evidence, and end the trial at that point with the finding of not guilty. If this motion is denied, the defense then begins their case. Here’s an example of how the thinking can work, from real life. A man named Crowder was accused of felony destruction of property. For this charge to stick, the property in question must be valued at at least $1,000.00 At trial, the Commonwealth proved that Crowder drove his brother’s new pickup truck to a party. After spending some time at the party, Crowder asked an acquaintance, Thomas, if he would like to go for a ride in the new truck. Thomas agreed and the two men, with Crowder driving, proceeded to a nearby field that was leased by Neil Cash. Cash raised barley in the field and, at the time Crowder drove into it, the barley was “within eight to ten days of being ready to harvest.” Upon entering the field, Crowder “drove through” and “did donuts” in the crops. The truck, according to Cash, “just shattered the barley all over the ground” and left ruts in the ground. Cash’s son, Joshua Cash, saw the truck driving in the field and drove his truck over to confront Crowder. Thomas and Crowder, seeing Joshua Cash approaching, departed from the field by “jumping a bank” onto the highway. Joshua Cash, however, obtained the license plate number from the truck and reported the incident to the sheriff. During the trial, the prosecutor called Neil Cash to the stand and asked him, “It’s been alleged that the damage to your property was in the amount of $2,000.00. How did you arrive at the amount of damage that was done to your property, sir?” Cash replied, “Well, I figured - I had two - three other farmers there to come and give me an estimate on what they thought the property damage was. That’s taking into consideration plowing, working the ground, re-seeding. I put down grass seed. Now I’m going to have to go back and do it over because of the ruts and stuff in it.” At the end of the prosecution’s case, the defense asked the court to strike the evidence because it was insufficient to prove the value of the destroyed property. Not only did the prosecution misstate the value ($2000 vs. the actual allegation of greater than $1,000) but the witness never stated, specifically, that he adopted the $2,000 figure the prosecutor said, the $1,000 figure that was actually being alleged, or indeed any other figure. In other words, from that testimony, no rational trier of fact could have found that the value of the destroyed property was over $1,000, because no on said it was. As the court’s opinion said: > [@](#): > > At trial, the prosecutor took the position that his interrupted attempt at a leading question on direct examination (“It’s been alleged that the damage to your property was in the amount of $2,000.”) …somehow established $2,000 as the damage > estimate. Suffice it to say, however, counsel cannot testify and indictments are not evidence. > > True, admissible or not, the prosecutor’s comments about the $2,000 figure could have > been adopted by Cash in his testimony absent a valid objection. Cash, however, was never asked if he agreed with the $2,000 figure. The only question asked of Cash was “How - how did you arrive at the amount of damage that was done to your property, sir?” His elliptic reply was that he had obtained estimates from two or three other farmers. Cash never said what those estimates were. Nor did Cash say whether those estimates confirmed the $1,000 allegation of the indictment or the $2,000 figure erroneously attributed by the prosecutor to the indictment. For this reason, the truck-driving nut Crowder was off the hook. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1836 "2012-05-21T19:10:54Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > If Martin punched Zimmerman and then turned and walked away. then Zimmerman had no right to shoot Martin. Of course the Forensic evidence indicates that didn’t happen. Actually, the forensic evidence shows just one small scratch below the knuckle on Martin’s left ring finger. This does not suggest a continuous attack does it? If Martin did more than punch Zimmerman once, why doesn’t the forensic evidence show any more indication on Martin’s body? I think you are a little too certain about what the forensic evidence “suggests” imho. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1837 "2012-05-21T19:26:22Z")
**Bricker** , is that from a real case, where the guy who received the estimate testified that he received estimates from other farmers but **never stated what the estimates were**? I’m just wondering if I read that correctly. If that is what sunk their case and lead to the judge agreeing that their was insufficient evidence, why didn’t he prosecutor ask Cash on the stand what the dollar amount of the estimates were that he received, explicitly? ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1838 "2012-05-21T19:30:21Z")
I’m starting to think the encounter escalated into violence over a struggle for the gun. The assertion that Martin went beserk because a stranger asked him a question never made sense. Banging Zimmerman’s head against the ground ( let’s face it, cement is unlikely), is an extreme fear and/or anger response. It would also explain why Zimmerman didn’t do any significant damage to Martin until the shot; one hand was on the holster or gun during entire fight. If Martin was on top of Zimmerman, he could have used a hand or leg to pin his gun hand and push his head back or punch him. This scenario would be predicated on Zimmerman either purposefully or inadvertently displaying his gun before the confrontation turned physical. In other words, we’ll never know. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1839 "2012-05-21T19:43:23Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > **Bricker** , is that from a real case, where the guy who received the estimate testified that he received estimates from other farmers but **never stated what the estimates were**? I’m just wondering if I read that correctly. > > If that is what sunk their case and lead to the judge agreeing that their was insufficient evidence, why didn’t he prosecutor ask Cash on the stand what the dollar amount of the estimates were that he received, explicitly? It’s absolutely from a real case. _Commonwealth v. Crowder_, 41 Va. App. 658 (2003). The prosecutor thought he had asked in enough detail. Or at least, that’s what he argued. The real answer is that the prosecutor forgot. He asked how Cash established the value and Cash answered. The prosecutor did not, as he should have, mentally replay that answer and realize that Cash had failed to come up with a dollar figure on his own, or even to explicitly endorse the dollar figure the prosecutor mentioned. Which he shouldn’t have done anyway; that’s a leading question. The proper questions would have been: “Sir, did you have occasion to determine the dollar value of the destroyed property?” “Yes.” “What was that value?” “$2,000” “And how did you determine the value?” “I asked three farmers in the area, blah blah blah…” “And did any of these estimates indicate that they reflected the fair market value of the property?” But he didn’t. Instead, he relied on the ordinary, human inference – I mentioned $2,000; the witness didn’t disagree; that’s that. Can’t do that. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1840 "2012-05-21T19:47:35Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Are you freaking serious? I have to prove to you that a 17 year old would be aware of the existence of the words “I”, “am”, “begging” and “you”, and that he would have the linguistic ability to use them together in a sentence? You need some sort of proof of this before you can accept it? Seriously? Out of curiosity, what sort of evidence would you accept on this point? What on earth would move your opinion on this short of a video of Martin using these exact words in this particular order? I’m totally serious. Michigan started it by referencing a popular song in #1794 with that phrase. It turned out it was begging for a handjob. If you want to claim that that phrase is in popular culture, then you need to find a reference that makes sense in this context or simply drop the claim that it was popular vernacular. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125/1841 "2012-05-21T20:01:17Z")
I’m beggin you to let that argument go, because it’s retarded. It’s a perfectly servicable English language phrase that is used by more than just Nobel laureates. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=91) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/martin-zimmerman-humble-opinions-and-speculation-thread/619125.md?page=93)