# State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman Trial Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 20, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501 "2013-06-20T20:32:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 116
**Author:** ![Mr-Pookie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@Mr-Pookie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr-Pookie)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2301 "2013-07-16T15:14:30Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Perhaps, sure. Evidence suggests otherwise, though. What leads to believe that Martin had no choice but to attack? > > They aren’t _absolutely_ unknown, but they are unknown to some degree, yes. > > I was responding to **brazil84** ’s summary, which seems to be the majority but not the only view amongst those who believe Zimmerman to be guilty. I will turn around the defense’s favorite phrase and say prove Trayvon wasn’t defending himself with that punch and wrestling. And, for the sake of the argument, you aren’t allowed to use any of GZ’s accounts, just as others never got to use Trayvon’s account over the last 17 months. GZ was rightfully found not guilty. I believe that is largely based on an overwhelming lack of evidence. That same lack of evidence can’t prove Zimmerman’s claims that Trayvon attacked for no apparent reason other than “male ego”. And so, it shouldn’t be casually stated as fact that Trayvon attacked without cause. You can say “I believe that is what happened” and I’ll never have issue with it. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2302 "2013-07-16T15:17:51Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Zimmerman’s first mistake was characterizing Martin as a drugged-out armed thug, casing the neighborhood. Can you quote a reliable source which has Zimmerman characterizing Martin as a “drugged-out armed thug, casing the neighborhood”? > [@](#): > > His second mistake was characterizing the beating he was getting as life threatening, because it wasn’t. I disagree. For one thing, having your head slammed into concrete can be life threatening. For another thing, he had no way of knowing if he was about to get his head slammed another 10 times. > [@](#): > > If he hadn’t been armed, he would have been fine, and Martin would be alive. How do you know that Martin would have stopped beating Zimmerman before Zimmerman suffered a fatal injury? > [@](#): > > As this case dragged on, though, I feel like people on Team Zimmerman have become detached from the reality of the case and are instead incredibly vested in their nitpicking of facts and legal arguments. The 911 operator is not a cop! And he didn’t say not to follow him in those exact words! And he had every legal right to follow him anyway! It’s hard to say if that’s nitpicking since the thrust of Team Trayvon’s argument on this point is not very clear. The argument seems to be as follows: (1) Zimmerman did something inappropriate. (2) If he had not done it, then the confrontation would not have happened and Martin would not have been shot and killed. (3) ??? (4) Therefore Zimmerman is criminally responsible for Martin’s death. Anyway, if somebody exaggerates or makes up facts to put one of the parties in a worse light, it’s not unreasonable to correct them. For example, if I asserted that Martin was high on marijuana at the time, would it be nitpicking to point out that his blood THC levels were actually pretty low? > [@](#): > > And there’s no “credible” evidence that contradicts the basic facts of this story! Lol, that’s hardly nitpicking or being legalistic. That’s a serious problem for people who want to hang Zimmerman. > [@](#): > > The problem as I see it is that if you embrace those arguments too strongly, where does it take you? In Florida, can I break into your house, threaten to rape your wife, and if you attack me, defend myself with deadly force? It certainly appears that way. I doubt it. I don’t know Florida law on this point, but normally a person who is in the process of committing a violent felony has no legal right of self-defense against someone who is privileged to use force against him. And by the way, since you used this example, it’s not nitpicking to point out that what Zimmerman did in following Martin was not illegal. It’s demonstrating that his situation was clearly different from your hypothetical. > [@](#): > > The rest of us are better off trying to figure out how we can prevent the mistakes that Zimmerman made. Why not try to prevent the mistake that Martin made? Is it that the Zimmermans of the world are moral actors and the Martins are not? > [@](#): > > I don’t see how we’re going to ever do that if half the country won’t even admit that he was in the wrong. He was wrong only in the victim-blaming sense that he made a poor decision by following a suspicious person. ---
**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 16, 2013, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2303 "2013-07-16T15:22:36Z")
> [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > I will turn around the defense’s favorite phrase and say prove Trayvon wasn’t defending himself with that punch and wrestling. And, for the sake of the argument, you aren’t allowed to use any of GZ’s accounts, just as others never got to use Trayvon’s account over the last 17 months. It can’t be proven, but we can look at the evidence. Did Martin have any wounds that were inflicted upon him prior to the shooting? No. Are Zimmerman’s wounds consistent with a fight for the gun? No, his injuries are confined to his face and head, and he had no scratches, scrapes, or bruises on his hands. So, given that, it doesn’t seem likely that Martin was defending himself from an attack from Zimmerman, or from Zimmerman drawing his gun. > [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > GZ was rightfully found not guilty. I believe that is largely based on an overwhelming lack of evidence. That same lack of evidence can’t prove Zimmerman’s claims that Trayvon attacked for no apparent reason other than “male ego”. And so, it shouldn’t be casually stated as fact that Trayvon attacked without cause. You can say “I believe that is what happened” and I’ll never have issue with it. Reasonable conclusions can be drawn. That said, you are correct, it can’t be proven. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2304 "2013-07-16T15:24:22Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > How so? You’re the one who educated me on Florida law a few weeks ago. It doesn’t matter if I’m committing a felony, as long as I’ve exhausted all means of escape and I’m in fear for my life. Right? No, if you’re charged with that felony, AND with murder, then no, you have no self-defense argument whatsoever - according to Florida law. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2305 "2013-07-16T15:26:26Z")
> [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > I will turn around the defense’s favorite phrase and say prove Trayvon wasn’t defending himself with that punch and wrestling. Whether Trayvon was defending himself is irrelevant to the legal case. There is nothing in the law that says “if the other party was defending him/herself, your self-defense argument is invalid”. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2306 "2013-07-16T15:27:23Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > There are numerous examples of people killed after ONE punch. There are also examples of people who fall and hit their head on something, get up, walk away, and die a few hours later from bleeding inside their brain. I’m not an expert on physical violence, but I think too many people get their knowledge from Hollywood. In the movies, you can get hit on the head with a monkey wrench and the worst that will happen is you are knocked out for a few hours and wake up with a headache. ---
**Author:** ![Tollhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e99b99/32.png) [@Tollhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tollhouse)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2307 "2013-07-16T15:37:50Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > You think you can legally shoot someone in the heart for following you? > > (Setting aside that it’s disputed whether Zimmerman followed Martin until the confrontation, or whether he’d stopped following him). You mean… for intimidating a person, acting in a threatening manner causing them to fear for their life? ---
**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 16, 2013, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2308 "2013-07-16T15:41:09Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > You mean… for intimidating a person, acting in a threatening manner causing them to fear for their life? What about Zimmerman’s conduct would cause a reasonable person to fear an imminent threat to their life? ---
**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 16, 2013, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2309 "2013-07-16T15:42:07Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > You mean… for intimidating a person, acting in a threatening manner causing them to fear for their life? That doesn’t meet the standard allowing self defence. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2310 "2013-07-16T15:51:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, no, that’s not a true statement. > > I had hoped that my gentle spankings would have begun to cure people of this broad “no evidence” thing. Now I see why the manual recommends a cattle prod. > > Jeantel testified that she heard “a little bit” of Trayvon saying, “Get off, get off.” > > A finder of fact can believe that. And a finder of fact may make the following permissible inference: since Martin was saying, “Get off,” Zimmerman was “on” him in a way that constituted unwanted touching. Unwanted touching is a battery. And that would make Zimmerman the aggressor. > > That’s what we call “evidence.” > > Now, according to one juror’s interview, the jury did not find Jeantel credible. But that doesn’t destroy the fact the her testimony was evidence. It just means that for those particular finders of fact, it wasn’t credible evidence. In order for her opinion of who said “get off” a little bit the microphone has to either have fallen off Martin or picked up another person’s voice or no words were heard. The only person showing any signs of attack is Zimmerman. and it corresponds to his video re-enactment where he is shown struggling to get Martin off him after being punched in the nose. So it’s not necessarily correct to say the jury disbelieved DeeDee’s testimony, just her opinion of it since she faintly heard the words and couldn’t see who said them. ---
**Author:** ![Tollhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e99b99/32.png) [@Tollhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tollhouse)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2311 "2013-07-16T16:00:22Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > That doesn’t meet the standard allowing self defence. If gz pounced on him and mma style tried to overpower tm hell yea it would. And also, I thought, but like you, Im not a lawyer, I thought under the law tm didnt even need to leave a scratch for gz to feel his life was in danger. Gz was an older much stockier, heavier man who had mma training and a gun and was following and intimidating tm. Tm was the one who feared for his life, not gz. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2312 "2013-07-16T16:04:21Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > How so? You’re the one who educated me on Florida law a few weeks ago. It doesn’t matter if I’m committing a felony, as long as I’ve exhausted all means of escape and I’m in fear for my life. Right? Nope. > [@](#): > > 776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who: > (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or > (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless: > (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or > (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force. A person who initially provoked the use of force against himself – what you say is true. It doesn’t matter if he provoked the use of force or not, as along as he exhausted every reasonable means to escape. But a person who is committing a forcible felony does not have that option. If he’s committing a forcible felony he loses any right to use deadly force in return. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2313 "2013-07-16T16:07:17Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > If gz pounced on him and mma style tried to overpower tm hell yea it would. And also, I thought, but like you, Im not a lawyer, I thought under the law tm didnt even need to leave a scratch for gz to feel his life was in danger. If you had evidence that that happened then you’d have a case. > [@Tollhouse](#): > > Gz was an older much stockier, heavier man who had mma training and a gun and was following and intimidating tm. Tm was the one who feared for his life, not gz. GZ was an out of shape person with medical problems. There’s no evidence Martin had a scratch on him. He was taller and in excellent physical health. The evidence shows Zimmerman had a broken nose and signs Martin was on top of him beating him which was backed up by witnesses. You can make up scenarios that are possible but you need evidence that backs it up. ---
**Author:** ![Lochdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@Lochdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lochdale)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2314 "2013-07-16T16:08:17Z")
I am confused and need my ignorance fought. How did Zimmerman’s defense of self-defense differ from the “stand your ground” law that this case was initially supposed to hinge on? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2315 "2013-07-16T16:09:50Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > The problem as I see it is that if you embrace those arguments too strongly, where does it take you? In Florida, can I break into your house, threaten to rape your wife, and if you attack me, defend myself with deadly force? It certainly appears that way. Is that really the world we want to live in? Or is that simply the regrettable result of our imperfect laws, a result that we should be saddened by, even if we understand the specific steps we took to arrive there? Your post is a good one, but (again) this specific example is flawed. In Florida, if you break into house and threaten to rape my wife you’ve committed a forcible felony and may not use deadly force to defend yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2316 "2013-07-16T16:13:11Z")
> [@Lochdale](#): > > I am confused and need my ignorance fought. How did Zimmerman’s defense of self-defense differ from the “stand your ground” law that this case was initially supposed to hinge on? I don’t recall his lawyers ever trying to use SYG as a defense. They even waived a separate hearing on that with the option to bring it up in trial. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2317 "2013-07-16T16:13:55Z")
> [@Lochdale](#): > > I am confused and need my ignorance fought. How did Zimmerman’s defense of self-defense differ from the “stand your ground” law that this case was initially supposed to hinge on? Zimmerman claimed he was attacked by Martin, unable to retreat, and in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury. Those claims are “classic” self-defense. In classic self-defense, you can’t use deadly force if you could have retreated. The stand your ground law removes the duty to retreat - it says that if you are where you legally have a right to be, and doing what you legally have a right to do, you cannot be compelled to retreat in order to avoid having to defend yourself. You don’t have to back down, in other words, while under classic self-defense you DID have to back down to avoid killing. But if you couldn’t retreat – if it’s him or you – all states permit you to use deadly force to defend yourself against the fear of serious injury or death. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2318 "2013-07-16T16:15:26Z")
> [@Tollhouse](#): > > If gz pounced on him and mma style tried to overpower tm hell yea it would. And also, I thought, but like you, Im not a lawyer, I thought under the law tm didnt even need to leave a scratch for gz to feel his life was in danger. > Gz was an older much stockier, heavier man who had mma training and a gun and was following and intimidating tm. Tm was the one who feared for his life, not gz. No witness testified to seeing Zimmerman pounce on Martin, on Zimmerman overpower Martin. Witnesses testified that they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2319 "2013-07-16T16:17:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > In order for her opinion of who said “get off” a little bit the microphone has to either have fallen off Martin or picked up another person’s voice or no words were heard. The only person showing any signs of attack is Zimmerman. and it corresponds to his video re-enactment where he is shown struggling to get Martin off him after being punched in the nose. Suppose Zimmerman grabbed Martin’s arm. Martin, scared, said “Get off,” in a voice made faint by fear. That’s consistent with her testimony, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2320 "2013-07-16T16:33:46Z")
[QUOTE=Tollhouse] If gz pounced on him and mma style tried to overpower tm hell yea it would. [/QUOTE] The grass stains and wetness on Zimmerman’s back, the lack of such on Martin’s back, the grass stains and moisture on Martin’s knees, and the lack of such on Zimmerman’s knees, indicate that this did not happen. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501.md?page=115) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501.md?page=117)