Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread

[monstro]

@Terr

Huh? What discrepancy? Witness 6 saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. He was looking from 10 yards away. Not one other witness definitively contradicts this. One, I think, claims that they saw a “wider man” on top - it will be so much fun when defense in response dims the lights in the courtroom, puts up Zimmerman 100 feet away next to someone with Martin’s weight/height, and asks the witness which one is “wider”.

I’m not going to insult your intelligence, but man, you’re really not making it easy.

I am not talking about this.

I am talking about Martin’s body position. Witness 6 says he saw Martin “sprawled out”.

This contradicts how other witnesses described Martin’s body, as well as what is in the police report (iirc).

If Witness 6 is wrong about this, why should we believe the rest of his story? (Especially since now he’s saying he’s not sure about anything anymore.)

[Fear_Itself]

@John_Mace

I think a sidewalk is a more credible place to get lacerations than grass.

…

And there is no reason to assume he died or became unconscious instantaneously.

Since “credibility” is apparently the determining factor, which is more credible: a man is shot throught the heart and falls dead where he was shot, or a man is shot through the heart, yet he gets up and walks away from the sidewalk.

[Terr]

@monstro

I am talking about Martin’s body position. Witness 6 says he saw Martin “sprawled out”.

Define “sprawled out”. What do you think it means, and, more importantly, what does “witness 6” think it means?

[Bricker]

@monstro

I’m not assuming it. I’m still waiting to hear from Zimmerman what happened.

If Zimmerman says that Martin was found right where he fell, never to move again and he says that he didn’t flip him over, THEN that would be suspicious to me. I’m already not understanding how Martin could slip off of Zimmerman and fall on his stomach with his hands underneath him (seems like he would have fallen back, with his arms sprawled outward.) But I really don’t understand how Martin could have done this and also oriented himself in the opposite position that you’d expect him to be. If Martin had been banging Zimmerman’s head into the sidewalk, you’d expect the kid’s head to be near the sidewalk. Not his feet. (This is also assuming that only Zimmerman’s head was on the sidewalk, with the rest of his body on the grass).

So it rests on what Zimmerman said that night. If Zimmerman allows for some flailing and flip-flopping, this is not an issue. But if Zimmerman says anything like, “After I shot him, he said ‘You got me!’ and fell to the side like a ton of bricks. I didn’t move him at all since I knew the police were coming, but I knew he was dead” then I’m going to be saying “WTF!” I will want to know how Martin came to be positioned in a way that does not jibe with the other claims in the story.

Gotcha. Makes perfect sense.

[John_Mace]

@Fear_Itself

Since “credibility” is apparently the determining factor, which is more credible: a man is shot throught the heart and falls dead where he was shot, or a man is shot through the heart, yet he gets up and walks away from the sidewalk.

I don’t know enough about gunshot wounds to say either way. I’ve seen lots of lacerations, but I’ve never seen anyone shot.

[Bricker]

@brazil84

From a legal perspective, I would say it goes to Zimmerman’s state of mind. To illustrate, imagine that before going out that night, Zimmerman had put a message on his facebook page that he was hoping to kill a punk that night. The prosecution would be entitled to introduce such a statement into evidence to show that Zimmerman was looking for trouble and therefore the jury should be skeptical of his testimony that Martin initiated the violence between them.

By contrast, if it turns out that Martin was high, it corroborates and bolsters Zimmerman’s claim that he had a legitimate reason to initiate the encounter with Martin.

Of course, the THC is also important from an emotional perspective, since the prosecution would like to be able to portray Martin as a sweet innocent angel.

Even if we imagine Zimmerman could correctly discern marijuana intoxication by looking across the street at someone? Ok, I guess it would help rebut the profiling claim.

Only problems are: that’s an imaginative leap, and we CAN’T discard the science that says Martin wasn’t actually high at he time. He had smoked up earlier, most likely, and was no stranger to weed, but not high at the time.

All this does is vilify the victim, and it should be inadmissible.

I say “should” not to indicate moral conviction but to say that under most circumstances, it won’t be.

[Martin_Hyde]

@John_Mace

I think a sidewalk is a more credible place to get lacerations than grass. Seems to me if you want to explore every possible angle of how the lacerations were obtained, you should do the same for how witness could be mistaken about how they interpret what they saw. Eyewitnesses are notoriously easy to discredit, and it was dark, after all. And there is no reason to assume he died or became unconscious instantaneously.

I find it strange so much attention is being paid to body position, I just don’t think it will prove to be important at trial whatsoever. The assumption that it could be important is based entirely on a supposition that Zimmerman may have told police “Martin fell dead instantly and did not move one centimeter.” Do we have any evidence that Zimmerman said that? We have no idea how specific Zimmerman was in his description of Martin’s last moments to police.

But the reality is Martin almost certainly was moved or moved himself after being shot. If someone is on top of you and you shoot them and they immediately lose consciousness, it is actually not likely at all that they fall backwards, they will fall forward. If they were on top of you punching downwards toward you, then their center of gravity is more towards leaning onto you and not backward, the bullet wouldn’t push someone back at all, so if the body lost consciousness it would fall with gravity–forward. Which would mean right on top of Zimmerman. This means either Zimmerman laid their with a dead guy on top of him until police arrived, or he had to physically move Martin to get out from under him, and said movement can explain a lot of different body positions.

[Bricker]

@Fear_Itself

Since “credibility” is apparently the determining factor, which is more credible: a man is shot throught the heart and falls dead where he was shot, or a man is shot through the heart, yet he gets up and walks away from the sidewalk.

The first.

But how about the man staggering back and convulsing as he fell?

Equally credible.

Why didn’t you offer that choice?

[Martin_Hyde]

@Bricker

Even if we imagine Zimmerman could correctly discern marijuana intoxication by looking across the street at someone? Ok, I guess it would help rebut the profiling claim.

Only problems are: that’s an imaginative leap, and we CAN’T discard the science that says Martin wasn’t actually high at he time. He had smoked up earlier, most likely, and was no stranger to weed, but not high at the time.

All this does is vilify the victim, and it should be inadmissible.

I say “should” not to indicate moral conviction but to say that under most circumstances, it won’t be.

Now you’re editorializing about the law, if it isn’t inadmissible it isn’t inadmissible. And I think the science on whether he is high or not isn’t so 100% clear cut as you think, all the defense needs is one person with a Ph.D. in biology or something to say it was possible Martin was still under the psychoactive effects of marijuana.

[Martin_Hyde]

@Bricker

The first.

But how about the man staggering back and convulsing as he fell?

Equally credible.

Why didn’t you offer that choice?

I don’t know how much likelihood will play into it. If body position becomes at all relevant and isn’t easily explained by Zimmerman saying “yeah I had to move Martin off me to get up, and then I rolled him over to see what his condition was” or something along those lines just the fact that it is most definitely a possibility Martin was still moving for awhile after being shot should refute any prosecution claims that the body position is indicative only of where Martin fell and nothing else.

It seems you’re a hunter as well, so you know full well animals with heart shots can sometimes stagger along for a few feet. I know some people who take deer or elk with neck shots because they are less likely to allow any movement than a shot aimed at the heart/lung area. (I don’t go that route, neck shots if they hit the right place will limit movement completely but they can easily miss the spine and if they do it’s a lot more suffering for the animal than a heart/lung shot. Some people also take a neck shot to protect the meat from the damage that sometimes happens with a heart shot, but I think the heart/lung shot is the most humane way to kill.)

[enomaj]

@brazil84 Well, what did you mean by legitimate? If you meant the authority to ask Martin to state his business like I meant, Zimmerman doesn’t have it.

I’ll concede the THC doesn’t help Martin but that’s not what you said. You said that if Martin was high, which Zimmerman did not know for sure, thar would bolster Z’s decision making.

[Fear_Itself]

@Bricker

The first.

But how about the man staggering back and convulsing as he fell?

Equally credible.

Why didn’t you offer that choice?

Becaue in order to stagger, he would have to be on his feet. As we know, he was sitting on GZ when shot. Which is more credible: a man is shot through the heart, and dies where he is shot, or a man is shot through the heart, stands up, and staggers away from the sidewalk. Not what is remotely possible under just right conditions; but what is more credible.

[Martin_Hyde]

@Fear_Itself

Becaue in order to stagger, he would have to be on his feet. As we know, he was sitting on GZ when shot. Which is more credible: a man is shot through the heart, and dies where he is shot, or a man is shot through the heart, stands up, and staggers away from the sidewalk. Not what is remotely possible under just right conditions; but what is more credible.

Bricker is a nice enough guy so he’ll probably answer the way you want him to, but the fact is it doesn’t matter which is “more credible.” Both scenarios are highly possible, one isn’t “in the realm of remote possibility” and various law enforcement experts (including the FBI) and medical professionals will be available to testify about people who have continued gun fights, run, walked, staggered etc after being shot in the heart. You have not found anything that would prove anything against Zimmerman BRD in this line of questioning.

Plus, there is the fact Zimmerman probably had to move Martin’s body himself if Martin actually fell on top of him (which would be the most likely thing if Martin was rendered immediately unconscious by the heart wound.)

[Terr]

@Fear_Itself

Becaue in order to stagger, he would have to be on his feet. As we know, he was sitting on GZ when shot. Which is more credible: a man is shot through the heart, and dies where he is shot, or a man is shot through the heart, stands up, and staggers away from the sidewalk. Not what is remotely possible under just right conditions; but what is more credible.

Please give a link that explains exactly where in relation to the sidewalk the police found Martin’s body. Martin’s father, in a TV interview, claims that it was half on sidewalk, half on grass.

[Magiver]

@PatriotX

We’re not in a court of law.

Someone brought NHW as the reason why Z did something or other.
But what Z did wasn’t really in accord with NHW procedures afaict
So using NHW to justify the action doesn’t seem appropriate.

I am guessing that using NHW in the example that I replied to probably sin’t courtroom ready either.

I still have a whole law degree and bar exam to go before I am court room ready.

I am completely missing the relevance. Zimmerman was ostensibly trying to stop another neighborhood burglary, not follow NHW procedures to the letter. He did what was legal and made sense and that was maintain sight of Martin.

[Martin_Hyde]

Anyway, we’re back to Nancy Drew and Matlock discussions so I’ll check back in when more facts come out in the case.

[Fear_Itself]

@Martin_Hyde

Bricker is a nice enough guy so he’ll probably answer the way you want him to, but the fact is it doesn’t matter which is “more credible.”

Tell that to John Mace. He was the one who created the “credibility” standard.

[Honesty]

@PotLuck

Perhaps Zimmerman was covering his ass in a different way. He was found standing over someone he’d just shot to death – perhaps he didn’t want the witness to think, “Hey, this guy’s a potential threat and I’m afraid for my life. I should shoot him before he shoots me too.”

This is plausible but not likely (IMO). I suspect Zimmerman has some kind of narcissism (i.e content of his homemade website, putative bragging text messages, beating women, denigrating other racial groups and people) and likely went into a kind of “narcissistic rage” after being pummeled by someone who he felt was inferior to him (socially, physically, and instrically). In his mind, Martin likely “deserved” it.

IMO, to say “I shot the guy in self-defense” when no one asked him for a detailed explanation is analgous to a kid surrounded by cookie crumbs declaring, “I didn’t eat any cookies from the cookie jar”. To explicitly use the words “self-defense” before a statement or the arrival of the police is very telling, IMO. It tells me he was not thinking of not safety of others (calling the cops), not the health of Trayvon Martin (e.g. paramedics or first-aid), but covering his own legal culpability in the situation. Even if he didn’t care about Martin or others (which is obvious), him feigning genuine concern and remorse immediately after the shooting would’ve improved his moral standing immensely. Instead, he tells a witness to call his wife (Where’s his cell phone? Why can’t he call?) to tell her that he shot someone.

• Honesty

[John_Mace]

@Honesty

This is plausible but not likely (IMO). I suspect Zimmerman has some kind of narcissism (i.e content of his homemade website, putative bragging text messages, beating women, denigrating other racial groups and people) and likely went into a kind of “narcissistic rage” after being pummeled by someone who he felt was inferior to him (socially, physically, and instrically). In his mind, Martin likely “deserved” it.

IMO, to say “I shot the guy in self-defense” when no one asked him for a detailed explanation is analgous to a kid surrounded by cookie crumbs declaring, “I didn’t eat any cookies from the cookie jar”. To explicitly use the words “self-defense” before a statement or the arrival of the police is very telling, IMO. It tells me he was not thinking of not safety of others (calling the cops), not the health of Trayvon Martin (e.g. paramedics or first-aid), but covering his own legal culpability in the situation. Even if he didn’t care about Martin or others (which is obvious), him feigning genuine concern and remorse immediately after the shooting would’ve improved his moral standing immensely. Instead, he tells a witness to call his wife (Where’s his cell phone? Why can’t he call?) to tell her that he shot someone.

• Honesty

He had already called the cops, and they were on the way.

But he should have called an ambulance no matter what.

[Magiver]

@John_Mace

He had already called the cops, and they were on the way.

But he should have called an ambulance no matter what.

would you call an ambulance to assist someone you shot in self defense? Consider you don’t know at the time that it’s all a misunderstanding, all you know is this guy was wailing on you like he was Charles Manson’s understudy.