Zimmerman shoots right-handed, but writes with his left.
As a moment’s thought would have made evident: if Zimmerman shot with his left hand, why would he wear his holster on the right hip?
Found a better pic of Z’s holster:
http://i41.servimg.com/u/f41/17/61/73/69/zimmer10.jpg
The only photo I’d seen previously was the one that also had his gun and magazine. This photo shows the other side, and includes the metal clip.
So I have to retract my statement about it stopping at a beltloop. With that holster, you can slide it anywhere you want it on your waist, if you clip it OVER your belt (or if you’re not wearing a belt.) If the clip is UNDER the belt, then it would again be limited by beltloops.
Why? This is a serious question. What, exactly, do you imagine the holstered, concealed gun is going to do by itself if it’s forgotten about?
Well, maybe, but that’s not relevant to anything in the case we’re discussing.
So why didn’t he use his gun as soon as he was attacked? Why did he wait until he’d been beaten? There is, once again, absolutely no evidence he’s lying and strong evidence he’s telling the truth.
IIRC, doesn’t gun training teach gun owners to shoot with their right hand? I would have sworn I read that somewhere. Doesn’t seem to make much sense; wouldn’t shooting with your dominant hand be safer/more accurate?
But yeah, either way - now it’s really bizarre that with his non-dominant right hand and arm, GZ a) pinned Martin’s hand between his arm and his body with his right arm,while b) unholstering his gun which was underneath him, then c) aimed and fired, all while keeping Martin’s hand pinnned between his right arm and body.
Ah - why indeed? Maybe, just maybe, because he’s not exactly telling the gospel truth about how the fight went down?
Well, his first mistake was leaving the witness alive. Amateur.
Generally you train with your dominant hand. Most modern firearms have ambidextrous slide releases, magazine releases, safeties, etc. (or at least the option.)
But, you also have to be prepared. In any event when your life will be in enough danger to have to use deadly force, it’s reasonable to assume that your dominant hand will be injured. Say you get stabbed in the shoulder of that arm. Prudence dictates that you practice off-hand drawing and shooting. And it takes work, for sure. My groupings with my left hand are far worse than with my right, but at the distances involved in most situations of self defense, the human body is still a relatively large target, at least at center-of-mass.
That’s why the aforementioned cross-hand draw with chest rotation was used in defense and police training for years. What do you do if your dominant hand is unusable?
Sounds odd to the layman, but it’s covered in the basic classes.
Depending on what one considers evidence in the matter of determining credibility. By your personal standards of evidence, there is none. Other people, in fact many other people, find that by the standards of evidence they use,( and are legally entitled to use on a jury) there is abundant evidence that he is a liar and has lied about many things including this.
So your opinion is that there is no evidence, and you are more than entitled. But it inaccurate to make a declaration that no evidence exists, period.
No. This is not about my opinion, it’s about a dispassionate observation of the facts. There is, factually speaking, no actual evidence that he’s lying about forgetting he was armed, and significant evidence that he was telling the truth. This is not opinion, but observation, as should all statements about whether evidence exists.
That doesn’t mean you are obliged to accept that evidence, although my opinion is that it’s strong enough to be accepted. Whether evidence is strong enough to support a claim is always a matter of opinion.
You may ignore my opinion, but not the facts.
I move that we call Dr. Bao to the thread, in order to explain, once again, the difference between fact and opinion!
He does that so well, you know.
Unless you take away his script–er, notes.
And he might change his mind tomorrow.
Please, if you would, state what evidence you believe is significantly supportive of the proposition that Zimmerman is telling the truth about his memory regarding having his gun.
Firstly, his statement that he forgot about it.
Secondly, the fact that he didn’t use it until he’d been beaten for a significant length of time.
The first you may casually dismiss, if you like, due to your views on his credibility. The second is more problematic. It’s evidence that either he forgot about his weapon, or he knew about it but chose not to use it. The latter is the one that would look better for his case, so the fact that he says otherwise points in his favour.
There’s been plenty of people who know the law and/or carry weapons that have said that, in their training, they’ve been instructed that they could shoot much earlier than Zimmerman did, and that they believe they would, in fact, do that.
Zimmerman, despite his firearm training and knowledge of the law, did not shoot earlier. Why not?
I’m certain he tried to, but Martin was preventing him from pointing the gun at him while they struggled on the ground, hence Martin’s screaming. The gun came out much earlier than Zimmerman says, and I say that for a number of reasons. Not the least being the story of how it came out as yet another “are you fucking kidding me?” tale from GZ.
Objection! Calls for speculation.
(Any judge other than Nelson may rule.)
What are you basing your claim that it was Martin screaming on? What evidence there is for that claim has been thoroughly discredited.
I am, again, amused by your hypocrisy. You have repeatedly (and falsely) accused me of making unsupported declarations of fact, and here you are doing just that. Without evidence, you claim it was Martin screaming, and that the gun came out earlier. Your disbelief of Zimmerman’s “tale” isn’t evidence of anything except your prejudice.
Support those statements or withdraw them.
I will also note, again with amusement, that even your absurd hypothetical describes Zimmerman shooting Martin in justified self defence.
-
This is purely a question of self defense as the defendent (GZ) has put forth as his main defense. Any comments about stand your ground might as well be comments about how pretty rainbows are (or aren’t).
-
GZ was liscensed to carry a gun, was his constitutional right to carry. (Regardless of whether or not you agree about it, its still the law.) GZ began carrying the gun after being told by the City to carry one because of a stray pitbull he had reported. This stray cornered his wife once, and had growled at some neighbors. He got the liscense to carry the gun because the City recommended it. Not because of some cop wanna be fantasy.
-
8 recent break ins and burglaries had occured in the housing area recently. Dozens more of attempted break ins were reported. Within a month of the TM shooting, GZ had reported a suspicious kid near a house. The kid fled before cops could get there. House was later burglarized. Cops caught and charged a black youth for the crime. GZ identified the kid as the same one he had previously called about. (sound familiar).
-
TM had been busted at school with stolen property from nearby burglaries and burglary tools in his possession.
-
TM posted videos of street fights and illicit drug use.
-
TM autopsy shows THC in his blood.
Night of events.
-
GZ sees youth acting suspicious (loitering in the yard of house in the rain). GZ calls it in to 911.
-
TM is spotted by GZ, path is out of the way from where one would normally walk to get to store from TM residence.
-
GZ gets out of truck to determine location and see which direction TM went.
-
Operator asks “are you following?” GZ says yes. Operator says “we don’t need you to do that”.
-
GZ and TM get into an altercation between where GZ hung up and his truck. (GZ clearly headed back to truck).
-
GZ back wet and covered with grass. Lacerations to back of skull, bruised eyes, lips, broken nose.
-
TM dead from single gunshot wound. Cuts, scrapes and bruising on knuckles.
-
The only witness to actually see anything says TM on top beating GZ MMA style, GZ screaming help.
-
GZ passes lie detector test.
-
Days later cops try to trip GZ up in follow up interview by falsely claiming that they found videotape of incident, in attempt to get GZ to change parts of his story. GZ immediate response per the investigating officer - GZ visibly relieved, stated “Thank God”.
-
Several black colleagues and friends of the “racist” GZ testified to his character.
-
Investigating officer testified all evidence supports GZ story, and he believes GZ on all accounts.
Self Defense does not require any threshold of physical evidence of an attack. Any discussions about how bad GZ injuries are, once again rainbows. Only requirement is reasonable fear of safety, which has clearly been met by GZ account, the only eye witness, and all physical evidence. This trial is a farce. Any outcome other than not guilty will be quickly appealed and won on several missteps by the judge. Most notably is her refusal to dismiss the case after the prosecution rested without removing substantial doubt (much less reasonable) as IS REQUIRED.
And, for the record, the only thing that “Stand Your Ground” did was to remove the law’s requirement that one MUST retreat. As it stands now, one MAY retreat, but is not lawfully bound to do so, provided one has a legal right to occupy the location.
How about you support and prove with hard evidence that gz did not already draw his gun earlier than he said he did…(p.s., If your hard evidence is that gz said so, I dont count that as hard evidence, pinky swears don’t count)
Why? There’s no reason to attempt to prove his innocence. Pretty much the only evidence for exactly when the gun came into play is Zimmerman’s statement, so you either accept it, or accept that you don’t know when it was drawn.
Either way, you have no evidence to use against him, and no evidence he’s lying.
I will point out, as I’ve had to point out to several people, that a witness statement is hard evidence. That doesn’t mean you have to believe it, but you can’t simply claim it doesn’t exist.
Not how the law works. Hell, read the jury instructions.
The presumption of innocence is on Zimmerman. He (nor we) don’t have the burden of proof.
It’s on you to DISPROVE his claims.
Good luck with that.
(And the Chewbacca offense doesn’t work, either.)
(Shortened and combined for clarity)
While it was established in court that GZ was left-handed (meaning GZ wrote with his left hand), his neighbor testified that GZ shot with his right hand.
Some people are ambidextrous. There are some left-handed and right-handed people who can hit a baseball from either side of the plate. Most can’t.
Shooters have two left/right concerns when firing a firearm. It’s easier to hold and fire a pistol with your “strong” hand but you can learn to hold and fire with your “weak” hand. It was testified to in court that GZ practiced with both his weak and strong hands. He was better with his right hand. Most firearms and holsters are designed for right-handed use and carry.
You also have to consider which of your eyes are dominant. Right hand/right eye or left hand/left eye is the norm. Left hand/right eye is certainly do-able with practice but either weakens your wrist/forearm alignment or forces the shooter to lean their head in order to line up the pistol sights with their dominant eye. Many people shoot this way and never give it a 2nd thought.
People are trained to use whichever hand/eye combination works best for them.
Stop confusing people with facts, doorhinge.