Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread

In My Humble Opinion
4322

Right. But you gotta admit that it’s real funny that he didn’t articulate any of these multitude of reasons to the dispatcher. He only expressed the one that he’s now trying to hide.

The po baby. Still, what strikes me as funny is that he can remember so much detail about how he reached for his cellphone prior to supposedly being punched, and yet, when it comes to traveling the equivalent of one end of my condo to the opposite end, he draws a blank. It’s like, if we didn’t know any better, we’d get the impression that he chased Martin down to that point and then conveniently excised this detail from the rest of his narrative for self-serving reasons.

No he has plenty reason to lie about all of it, being that he’s been charged with murder.

Let’s say he fabricated the fight scene from whole cloth. (I know you dont believe this, but work with me here.) From the time the cops took him to the station to the time he was interviewed, he didn’t have a whole lot of time to get his details together. He could only come up with a solid enough skeleton to let him skate by until he was home and could sufficiently think straight. So he came up with the sucker punch scene, and the head banging scene, and the tonight you will die scene. A few embellishments here and there and that is what he provided on the night the shooting occurred.

In effect, if Zimmerman is lying about the fight, it shouldn’t be surprising that his story neglected to account for the obvious. A liar trying to get away with murder via a self-defense claim is more concerned about coming up with a story that has all the right legal elements (which explains why he said Martin threatened to kill him). Coming up with a story that actually meshes with the physical evidence is going to be of lesser importance when 1) the spotlight is trained in your face and 2) your awareness of the physical evidence is hazy because you were too busy trying to commit a crime to pay attention to those kind of details.

It doesn’t sound like you’re well-versed on GZ’s statement(s), which makes engaging you frustrating. Why the hell are you defending him if you don’t even know what he has been claiming?

Zimmerman said Martin was smothering him with one hand, and with his other hand, he was reaching for his gun. That is, until Zimmerman deftly pinned Martin’s arm in between Z’s body and his shooting arm. He even acts out this awkward bit of stupidity in his reenactment video.

They will have to prove their case, no doubt. Impeaching GZ’s credibility will be the first stage of doing that.

Let’s assume that Martin didn’t run away from Zimmerman. How in the hell does that lead to the conclusion that Martin attacked Zimmerman? Even if he wasnt afraid of him, it doesn’t mean he would launch an unprovoked attack against him. In fact, it is even less the case that he would do this, as the fight or flight response is lacking in people who are not afraid.

The logic your exhibiting is probably shared by Zimmerman, which is why he is trying to minimize Martin’s fear of him. The dumbass doesnt seem to realize that it would be in his best interest to portray Martin as panic-stricken and lashing out violently because of it. That is much more believable than a kid–a kid who skips away, mind you–with no history of violence suddenly thugging out on Zimmerman’s head for absolutely no reason at all.

4323

One of the reasons we know better is that his keys were found at or near the “T”. Having said that, and in general, even if some of his statements are self-serving that is not inconsistent with actual innocence.

How would it help him to state that such and such happened at a location everybody knows to be different from the actual one? How would it hurt him to say “and we wrestled around southwards for a bit to here” (and pick the actual location where the body was, etc.)? He may as well “lie” about the color of his pants that night.

I would also add that he wouldn’t know what witnesses might have seen either.

But that’s just it. He didn’t know what physical evidence or witness statements they would have, had little time to come up with a story and the truth of the matter is that the witness statements and physical evidence both mesh quite well with his account of what happened.

I’ll have to watch Zimmerman’s account again because I don’t remember the details of this specific part. For now, I’ll just say that whatever he said, the investigators did not make an issue of it.

And in the second stage they will impeach his character. And the final stage will be cobbling up some shaky theory based on Dee Dee’s testimony and Mary Cutcher’s intuitions with a lot of fanfare from De La Rionda.

Easy enough to do.

It doesn’t lead to that conclusion per se, but it makes Dee Dee’s statements more dubious, and eliminates the idea that Zimmerman 'chased him down".

I think he simply had the fight response when he saw Zimmerman crossing the T.

I’m glad your not his attorney- that sounds like the prosecution’s theory.

I think it’s more accurate to say he bounded away. He has no proven history of illegal violence, no. And he had a reason. Zimmerman called the cops on him and now he got out of his car and is poking around with a flashlight. And he’s on the phone with a girl.. so he thought he would put on a little show to impress her. He had all sorts of reasons to attack Zimmerman.

4324

So what? He could have thrown down his keys to pull out his gun.

Statements that are clearly self-serving diminish one’s credibility. if we can’t trust him to tell the truth about stuff that potentially makes him look bad, we have no reason to believe him when he says he acted lawfully.

This question presumes that Zimmerman was aware that his story was contradicted by what “everybody knew”. He didn’t know this when his statement was taken at the PD. Don’t mistake sloppiness in accounting for important details as innocence.

Why didn’t he say this, if this is what happened? The fact that he doesn’t say this, and yet he remembers minutia like how his jacket slid up when he wriggled, speaks volumes.

You seem to think this proves your point, but it actually supports mine. The witnesses all say the fight traveled. They could hear and/or see it move southward. When Zimmerman gave his statement, he wouldn’t have necessarily known what the witnesses saw. This is why the story he came up with contradicts theirs.

Not they don’t. Didn’t you just point out that the witnesses almost all claim the fight traveled? That is one big ole contradiction to GZ’s account. And very little of the physical evidence supports his story either.

His ass has been arrested and changed with 2nd degree murder. That’s a good sign the state ain’t buying what he’s selling.

This is an irrational conclusion, once again. Zimmerman was fully capable of chasing after Martin, even if we suppose that Martin skipped away from him fearlessly. Martin’s state of mind doesn’t prevent Zimmerman from pursuing and confronting him.

But you have no evidence of this at all.

This is so rich I have to quit before my iPad breaks.

4325

Or they might infer that since no housekeys were found in Trayvon’s possession, he was going to have to knock on the door until Brandy Green’s son let him in. And maybe he was afraid that Chad wouldn’t hear him knock if he was in the bathroom or blasting music or playing computer games with headphones on (in fact, that’s what Chad was doing, and he never heard any of the commotion outside).

So maybe Trayvon was worried that if Chad wasn’t quick enough to the door, Trayvon would be a sitting duck clearly visible on a well-lit stoop, leading the crazy man right to the house. And that’s a mighty fine reason to not just run on home.

4326

Everybody on the scene knew where Trayvon’s body was, where the shell casing was, etc. That was the one thing he could be certain that they knew.

He was unable to accurately pinpoint where the fight ended up. As I say, there could be many reasons for this. Of course, most of the physical evidence and eye-witness accounts are consistent with his account. You just have laser vision on anything that doesn’t line up perfectly.

It’s a good sign he was overcharged by a prosecutor with enormous pressure on her to file charges. The first investigation didn’t find murder. The first prosecutor didn’t even see manslaughter. That’s a good sign of the obvious: charges were filed because of the massive, widespread protests demanding it.

I have a question for you. You’ve found little holes in Zimmerman’s account and his character for you to prod and poke into. You present scenarios that cast doubt on certain aspects of his account of what happened. You don’t like Zimmerman’s account. OK. So, tell us what you think happened. Give us a consistent theory of what happened from the beginning of Zimmerman’s call to the arrival of the police man. What actually happened? What was Zimmerman really doing? What was Martin really doing?

4327

I don’t care when the call Started, I care when it Ended, which is 80 seconds before the 911 call from W11.

1915:23 - Approximate time call with Zimmerman ends
1916:43 - 911 call placed by (blacked out name) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help

That is the part that is relevant to Zimmerman’s calim that Martin contronted him 30 seconds after him hung up the phone. The rest of the timeline is irrelevant.

4328

The crime scene diagram actually has Martin’s body at an angle, but we don’t know what his position was before Zimmerman shoved him off and the police and the EMT’s worked on him. The actual photos of Martin’s body will not be published.

4329

I confirmed those numbers in: State v. Zimmerman: Evidence Released by Prosecutor | PDF

I feel a sense of relief. I was having trouble filling in the time before.

4330

When you have a cellphone, and can dial 911, Trayvon’s conclusions are suspect. The girlfriend seemed rather unconcerned.

4331

You ask this like you’re presenting some great, impossible challenge. Lol. (Apparently you have read very little of this thread, because I have been posting theories for what happened all over the place.)

(I apologize in advance for the changes in tense as I write this.)

My theory is that Martin was spooked by Zimmerman and he took off running. He ran behind the houses on Twin Trees and stopped somewhere to continue his convo with his gf. He didn’t keep running because he had little reason to assume that the creepy guy in the truck was actually crazy enough to pursue on foot; he may have thought that once he got away from the main street, Zimmerman would lose interest in him.

I believe he was standing behind one of the white dividers (see the second pic on this page to see what I’m referring to). This would explain why Z didn’t see him when he walked across the T. It is also possible Martin didn’t see Zimmerman cut across the T either, from this vantage point.

When his call with the dispatcher ended, there is a 2-minute gap between Z and Martin’s encounter with each other. So what was Z doing? Based on what he told the dispatcher, Zimmerman believed Martin was heading toward the back entrance of the complex. This entrance is where Rear View Circle empties. RVC is where Zimmerman supposedly ran to find an address when he was on the phone with dispatch. When he got off the phone, I suspect he * did not * immediately head back to his truck, but rather headed south on RVC to look for Martin down by the rear entrance.

When he didn’t find Martin down there, that is when he headed back towards his truck.

As he was walking across the T, he looks to his left and spots Martin. From this position he was able to see the kid behind the white divider when initially he wasn’t able to see him. Zimmerman immediately drops his flashlight in favor of grabbing his gun, and charges over to the kid.

Martin asks why are you following me? Zimmerman grabs or tries to grab the kid, they scuffle for a few moments while standing and moving around (this is what the witnesses who report the fight moving north to south hear) but the two eventually end up on the ground, wrestling. In the process of trying to hold onto Martin, his head connects with jagged-edged objects in the vicinity (there is a tree near, sprinkler head, and dog poop station); it is also possible that Martin popped him in the face as well. They end up in a chest to chest configuration, with Zimmerman on the bottom. He calls John for help, not because Martin is punching him but because he wants John to help him restrain the kid (interestingly enough, during the reenactment this is exactly what he says he instructed a witness to help him with after he shot Martin. It’s almost if he transplanted this part of the story to the end, even though it makes absolutely no sense why he’d need help restraining an unconscious person.)

At some point Martin stops fighting. The fight stops moving. All he does is scream for help as loud as he can. He’s kneeling and so is Zimmerman. Zimmerman holds onto the kid’s hoodie with his left hand, causing the fabric to pull away from the kid’s body. With his right arm, he aims his gun and fires it straight into the kid’s chest. The muzzle is in contact with Martin’s clothes, but a few inches from Martin’s skin. Forensics will later show that it was a contact shot for his clothes, but an intermediate shot to his body.

The end.

But forget about my theory. I have no idea what theory the prosecution will present to the jury. But let’s say they successfully impeach Zimmerman’s credibility. What exactly about Martin’s shooting do you think is so mysterious that the state will have a difficult time proving murder? Eons ago, I posted this synopsis of what the circumstantial and physical evidence suggest when you remove Zimmerman’s story from the equation. Do you really think a competent prosecutor can’t make a case off of this?

4332

Correct. A competent prosecutor (and much less Corey) can’t make a case off either your theory of what happened or your “synopsis”. For one simple reason - your theory is all conjecture with no support for it in evidence (at least not in evidence that was released), and your synopsis does not reach the level of “beyond reasonable doubt” proof by many, MANY miles.

4333

Where is the conjecture? Everything element of my theory is supported by evidence, either circumstantial or physical. Certainly supported by more evidence than the Martin-ambushed-and-whaled-on-Zimmerman theory.

4334

Really? Please point out specifically what evidence supports:

“Zimmerman immediately drops his flashlight in favor of grabbing his gun, and charges over to the kid.”

“Zimmerman grabs or tries to grab the kid”

“they scuffle for a few moments while standing”

“At some point Martin stops fighting. The fight stops moving.”

“He’s kneeling and so is Zimmerman. Zimmerman holds onto the kid’s hoodie with his left hand, causing the fabric to pull away from the kid’s body.”

4335

How is this anymore conjecture that assuming that the keys were dropped because Martin punched Zimmerman? (I don’t even think Zimmerman claimed this is what happened.) What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

That is supported by Deedee, who claimed she heard Martin yell “get off” before the phone died.

This is supported by witnesses who said the fight quickly moved from north to south.

This is supported by the sustained, unwavering yell on the 911 tape that suggests the absence of punching or wrestling. And no smothering.

Supported by gun forensics, and Martin’s prone body.

4336

Not “murder” but 2nd degree murder. And not manslaughter or 1st degree murder either. I don’t believe we’ve seen sufficient evidence of 2nd murder.

4337

Here’s the problem. The prosecution can’t say stuff like this. The prosecution can’t reason like this. The sauce for the goose must be beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s not the same as the sauce for the gander, at least at trial.

Maybe a more illustrative exercise might be imagining summation. This is the final argument to the jury, which consists of discussing the evidence that’s come out during the trial, and what the jury should conclude… basically, you are arguing, “You heard such-and-so piece of evidence, and from that, you know such-and-so ultimate fact.”

For example, one element the state must prove is that Treyvon Martin is dead. In this case, that’s pretty easy, but it has to be done. So in your summation, you would say something like, “You heard the testimony of Dr. Bao, the assistant medical examiner who performed the autopsy. We know that Treyvon Martin is dead from what he told you.”

If that, or something like it, is not in the record for each and every element, then a verdict of guilty cannot stand.

Here are the elements that the transcript has to show evidence for:

  1. Treyvon Martin is dead.

  2. The death was caused by the criminal act of George Zimmerman.

  3. The criminal act occurred in the state of Florida and the county of Seminole.

  4. There was an unlawful killing of Treyvon Martin by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.

  5. George Zimmerman did not reasonably believe that the force he used against Treyvon Martin was necessary to prevent his own imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

4338

At what point did this thread become a contest to write a really, really terrible screenplay?

4339

I believe the State’s case for this boils down to Zimmerman pursuing and killing an unarmed kid who was pleading for mercy until the very end. The bloodcurdling yell pushes it from manslaughter to murder. It would take a depraved mind to shoot someone who sounds like the voice on that tape.

4340

Both are conjectures. Glad you’re acknowledging yours.

I very much doubt Deedee will be brought to the stand, since she is about as incoherent a witness as can be found. She didn’t hear him “yell” it, she thought she heard him say it, and you have no idea what it means. Claiming that it means that Zimmerman grabbed him is conjecture.

Really? The witnesses saw the fight? Saw the men standing? No? Conjecture.

Conjecture. You have no idea who was yelling on that tape. FBI experts say they can’t tell if it was Zimmerman or Martin.

Gun forensics say nothing about whether Martin or Zimmerman was kneeling. Neither does Martin’s prone body, especially after Zimmerman handles it. Pure conjecture on your part.

Again, a bunch of conjectures. Doesn’t reach the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard by a country mile. How do you expect Zimmerman to be convicted using this, I have no idea.

4341

I can understand Zimmerman being stupid; all the evidence we have so far is that he IS stupid, whether or not he’s guilty.

What baffles me is that his lawyer was sitting right there letting him do the interview.

What the hell? Seriously. O’Mara has a good reputation - when he was announced as Zimmerman’s lawyer virtually every lawyer who knew him spoke very highly of his skill and professionalism. And there he was as his client babbled through an interview that the prosecution announced they were using as evidence approximately one trillionth of a second after it was done. What on earth is O’Mara doing? Is this part of some incredibly brilliant master plan I don’t understand?

ETA: After posting this I did more digging and found several articles asserting that

  1. Zimmerman is extremely desperate for money
  2. Zimmerman is, in fact, pretty mule-headed, being both stupid and stubborn, and
  3. O’Mara resignedly said “The client calls the shots,”

… so in fact it would appear possible O’Mara really wanted to shut Zimmerman up, but Zimmerman simply would not listen to reason.