# 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:** 126
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2501 "2013-07-17T20:49:37Z")
already answered ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2502 "2013-07-17T21:54:43Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Actually, I don’t think they decided that at all. I think they concluded that the state had not proven beyond all reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was not actually in fear of death. Not quite the same thing. > > Zimmerman was not found ‘innocent’, he was found ‘not guilty’. Are you not considered innocent until proven guilty? In a court of law if not on the internet? It’s the prosecution’s job to prove that a defendant is guilty of violating some state statute? In GZ’s case, the prosecution failed to convince a jury that GZ was guilty of violating Florida laws. Innocent UNTIL proven guilty. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2503 "2013-07-17T22:11:55Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Are you not considered innocent until proven guilty? In a court of law if not on the internet? Well, put it this way: It is a pity the jury had not the third option of the [“Scots verdict,”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven) or “Not proven.” (Which has been translated as “Not guilty and don’t do it again.”) ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2504 "2013-07-17T22:15:13Z")
> [@Mr-Pookie](#): > > …Trayvon, a kid who never did anything like this before (to anyones knowledge). A kid without an arrest record. A kid who never was in any serious trouble before. A kid who minutes earlier was walking home while having a conversation with a friend. > > Yep, Trayvon in that instant decided his first criminal activity was going to be murder of a stranger several feet from his house in front of a dozen witnesses. He was so sure of his killing abilities he brazenly said he would do it even before having the gun in his possession. He said it before it is likely he could have even seen the weapon… (shortened for clarity) The jury probably didn’t know (it wasn’t introduced in court) that TM was in the area because he serving yet another suspension from high school. A 10 day suspension this time. TM was having a convesation with a friend. That friend said TM was by his daddy fiance house which was some 300 feet away from where GZ was. TM returned to where GZ, exchanged some words with the creepy ass cracker, and then broke his nose. It appears that TM created a situation of imminent danger instead of leaving the area, staying where he was, or entering his daddy fiance house. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2505 "2013-07-17T22:35:19Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, put it this way: It is a pity the jury had not the third option of the [“Scots verdict,”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven) or “Not proven.” (Which has been translated as “Not guilty and don’t do it again.”) In Scotland. Are there any states in the U.S. that offers an option of “not proven”? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2506 "2013-07-17T22:39:14Z")
> [@Mgalindo13](#): > > A trained law enforcement professional pointed his finger like it was a gun because he wasn’t thinking clearly. And you think it’s unbelievable that a civilian could temporarily believe, for a matter of seconds, that he might have missed with his shot? No, not at all! I simply don’t believe it happened like that to _George Zimmerman specifically_ because \*\*\*all \*\*\*the evidence we have for his state of mind and emotional response to his Big Adventure, in the form of witnesses, video and audio, vital signs, and his own statements then and since tell us that he did not find the even particularly traumatic at all. Especially post-shooting. So it doesn’t matter what happens to some people sometimes or even most people most of the time. There is \*no evidence at all \*that it happened to this person this time, and I’m not going to assume that it did in spite of evidence to the contrary. I’ve been endlessly berated, without foundation, for ignoring evidence, so it would be pretty funny to be told I _should_ ignore it for _this_ particular issue. Nope, I’m stickin’ with what the evidence and the reasonable inferences that flow from that evidence tell me about these people in this instance, not interested in suppositions, theories, hunches or other guesswork that doesn’t involve the actual evidence. And part of that evidence, by the way, is the way GZ’s implausibilities, inconsistencies, gaps, etc. are all centered around details crucial to determining whether he actually had a right to act in self defense and whether he actually did so. And that makes a difference. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2507 "2013-07-17T22:40:38Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > That you think you would administer CPR on someone who attacked you is noble. I would not. How do you manage to equate not climbing on a mortally wounded man’s back with administering CPR? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2508 "2013-07-17T23:00:52Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > By the way, brazil… > So how is that supposed to work exactly? Give me a link to the video and tell me what time to look at. Duh. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2509 "2013-07-17T23:01:10Z")
> **[Videos](https://www.huffpost.com/section/video)** > > The latest breaking news video and visual storytelling from HuffPost. In her recent interview Rachel Jeantel made the claim that she thought Trayvon Martin threw the first punch. ---
**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 17, 2013, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2510 "2013-07-17T23:05:10Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > As I just mentioned, he didn’t say anything at all about that the night before. He didn’t say anything about that until he had a chance to think about how it really looked and sounded: bad. Very bad. [About that…](http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/10/19395261-defense-rests-in-zimmerman-trial-zimmerman-doesnt-take-the-stand) > [@](#): > > While still under direct examination, Root gave the court his opinion on the biggest worry with interviewing people who have been involved in shootings: memory issues. > > “People, when they’re involved in a high-stress event, can have what they call critical-stress amnesia, or they can have temporary memory holes, I call them,” he said. “Sometimes it takes up to 72 hours before they truly get their full memory back about everything that took place. And for some, depending on the stress of the event, they may never remember everything that took place.” > > He recommended delaying getting a police statement until 72 hours after a shooting has taken place to get the most accurate account. > [@Stoid](#): > > No, I was rejecting _ **your** _ explanation for the behavior a person could _expect_ from someone surrendering at the sight of a gun. Zimmerman never made any kind of claim that Martin was surrendering to him when he fell to the side, because he can’t even remember whether he pushed or Martin fell on his own. Eh? That is clearly what Zimmerman says he thought was happening: “After I shot him, he like sat up…and I didn’t think I hit him, because he sat up and he said, uh, ‘you got me, you got it, you got me’, something like that, so I thought he was just saying ‘I know you have a gun now, I heard it, I’m giving up.’ I don’t know if I pushed him off me or he fell off me. Either way, I got on top of him and I pushed his arms apart.” But, for us lesser lights, tell me: what can I expect from someone if they are atop me, fighting, and I pull and fire my gun? I’m sure you have tremendous experience with this. Zimmerman didn’t, though. > [@Stoid](#): > > So, are you saying that you think it’s reasonable to believe that Martin was alert and appeared normal when he had a bullet in his heart and a hole in one of his collapsed lungs? That there would be nothing unusual in his demeanor to give that little fact away? Did I ever say slowly? I don’t believe I did. As for “alert”, the bullet didn’t hit his CNS, so I don’t know why you’d expect him to suddenly become “sleepy”. Beyond that, I have no medical training or personal experience to tell me how people react in the seconds after being shot in the heart. Do you? Do “sleepy” acting people usually move quickly? Fun fact: Ronald Reagan was shot in the rib, and neither he nor the Secret Service realized it until they had driven away from the scene, when Reagan coughed up frothy blood. What liars, am I right? > [@Stoid](#): > > Well, no, I’m not shocked, because I don’t believe he did not notice. While I’m sure that, as someone said, he had one of those “oh my God I can’t believe I shot somebody” moments right after he did it, I do not believe that that actually manifested as Him having a genuine failure to understand and believe that he had shot Martin. I do not find that remotely believable. Believe whatever you want, just don’t pretend it’s based on anything but gut feelings. > [@Stoid](#): > > And I especially do not find it believable as a result of the incident being so overwhelming/scary/confusing/chaotic/, since both witnesses and medical tests showed that he was extremely calm and focused. If witnesses had reported him being frantic, babbling, confused, chaotic, generally “freaked out”, sure, I would believe lots of things due to that. But that’s not how he was. He was calm, cool, collected, and clear, as witnesses reported, as seen on tape, as vital signs confirmed. > > [In other words, in case you missed it, the _ **actual evidence** _ that we have on record in the form of witness statements, video, audio, and medical tests, all serve as proof that was not confused, freaked out, stressed, etc. Quite the contrary. And what makes you think that a “freak out” is required for memory to be affected? Your gut? > [@Stoid](#): > > And interestingly, I don’t recall _ **him** _ ever making any claims of that nature, apart from some vague “a lot was going on I don’t remember exactly” type of remarks. So he never hints that he might have memory issues, except when he says he “doesn’t know” or doesn’t remember things he’s asked. Got it. > [@Stoid](#): > > Some people here are accusing me of arriving at conclusions without evidence… which is pretty funny… Seeing as how the actual _evidence_ that we have for Zimmerman’s state of mind, which is considerable, obliterates the pure, unsupported speculation being tossed out that he was too wrecked after his Very Big Adventure to be expected to accurately recall or perceive things. I’ll just wait for your evidence that memory loss only occurs when the person ends up babbling incoherently and freaking out. > [@Stoid](#): > > Really hard to see how you arrived there, except that you just want to. He said it over and over and over again, more consistently than anything else, and since that is a factual statement, there is nothing remotely disingenuous about my saying so. Are you sure about that? [url=[http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/07/18/exclusive-george-zimmerman-breaks-silence-hannity?page=5#ixzz2ZLXqWDhY](http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/07/18/exclusive-george-zimmerman-breaks-silence-hannity?page=5#ixzz2ZLXqWDhY)]On Sean Hannity [/quote] , he said: ZIMMERMAN: Like I said, he sat up and he said something to the effect of “you got it” or “you got me”. I assumed he meant, OK, you got the gun, I didn’t get it. I’m not going to fight anymore. At which point I got out from under him. In his first interview with Serino, he said: Zimmerman: He kinda sat up and he said, “You got me.” and then Zimmerman: I don’t know…after “You got me”… I don’t remember. I’ve already quoted the walkthrough. In the second Serino interview, he isn’t asked about it. And in the Singleton interview, he says: Zimmerman: And then he falls off and he’s like all right, you got it. You got it. So, I can’t agree that he said “You got me” over and over, or more consistently than anything else. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2511 "2013-07-17T23:08:41Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > The difference between “you got me” and “you got me or you got it”? Actually it’s the difference between “you got me” and “you got me or you got it or something like that” [I’m paraphrasing] Anyway, the distinction is important, because your argument is as follows: (1) Zimmerman stated that he did not know at the time whether his shot hit Martin. (2) Zimmerman also stated that he heard Martin say “you got me” (3) After hearing “you got me,” Zimmerman would have known that his shot had hit Martin. (4) Therefore Zimmerman is not credible. Although it’s arguable that after hearing “you got me,” Zimmerman would have known, that’s not what he says he heard. He says he heard something far more ambiguous. It’s unfortunate that you are unable to grasp this distinction. Do you agree that “you got me” is far less ambiguous than “you got me or you got it or something like that”? ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2512 "2013-07-17T23:23:00Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Actually it’s the difference between “you got me” and “you got me or you got it or something like that” [I’m paraphrasing] > > Anyway, the distinction is important, because your argument is as follows: > > (1) Zimmerman stated that he did not know at the time whether his shot hit Martin. > > (2) Zimmerman also stated that he heard Martin say “you got me” > > (3) After hearing “you got me,” Zimmerman would have known that his shot had hit Martin. > > (4) Therefore Zimmerman is not credible. > > Although it’s arguable that after hearing “you got me,” Zimmerman would have known, that’s not what he says he heard. He says he heard something far more ambiguous. > > It’s unfortunate that you are unable to grasp this distinction. > > Do you agree that “you got me” is far less ambiguous than “you got me or you got it or something like that”? Since Rachel Jeantel is now going on talk shows and claiming that Trayvon threw the first punch, you either have to accept that Trayvon did begin the altercation, and George Z is telling the truth, or that Rachel Jeantel is lying. Though she also claims Trayvon would have stopped before Z’s demise. > **[Page Not Found](https://www.theinnoplex.com/news/newssub/rachel-jeantel-says-martin-threw-the-first-punch)** ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2513 "2013-07-17T23:29:11Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > No, it really isn’t, though that strawman is becoming ragged from overuse. I don’t think a single regular contributor to Zimmerman threads believes every word he says. Unless you can demonstrate that they do. I agree and I think this is an important point. It seems that for Team Trayvon, their main argument is that Zimmerman is not a credible witness. The funny thing is, I agree with this to a large extent. Peoples’ recollections of events tend to be extremely self-serving. And if the case hinged on Zimmerman’s credibility, I would be a lot more open to the claim that he is culpable. But the case does not hinge on Zimmerman’s credibility – the important aspects of his story are corroborated by credible evidence. Evidence which is so compelling that people on Team Trayvon have been largely unable to construct a plausible and reasonably detailed scenario in which Zimmerman is culpable. Instead, they must use words like “stalking” “profiling” and “struggle” which gloss over important details. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2514 "2013-07-17T23:29:23Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Back up. > Physics that a small child would understand > Gunbarrel aimed dead center of chest, touching clothes, a few inches from flesh. > Trigger squeezed. > BOOM…Kickback…heat… > > Stop. > > “I didn’t think I hit him” > > :dubious::dubious::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: > > Everything after is just _ **more** _ confirmation of what he had to already know: not only did he hit him, it was all but impossible to have missed him. > That Kool-Aid you’ve been sucking down is damn powerful stuff, that’s for sure. Unless the gun misfired somehow. That’s been known to happen. Firing pin crushes the primer. Primer contents burst into flames. Flames enter the brass case igniting the propellent. Solid porpellent converts to gas. Gas pressure fails to push the bullet all the way thru the barrel. No bullet exits the barrel. It happens. Was the muzzle pointed at TM’s heart, or at his chest, or in his general direction? How fast did this “draw and shoot” occur? Was there time to aim? What this some kind of “squeeze and pray” situation? Some people expect a gunshot victim to instantly collapse into a heap. That only happens if the victim was struck in the brain stem or upper vertebrae which disrupts all body motor functions. The body would collapse and fall straight down. How long does it take for the average gunshot wound to the chest to totally disable the victim, assuming the heart hadn’t been damaged? As an aside, it’s well known by hunters and veterinarians that a heart and/or double lung shot can stop a deer within minutes. A deer can run a long time with only one collapsed lung plus associated broken rib(s) and surrounding muscle tissue damage. If TM had spoken, had sat up, had stood up, had moved a short distance, it’s reasonable to assume that GZ would be confused about whether he had actually hit his attacker or knew whether his attacker was disabled, dead, or dying. GZ reaction to having shot TM had nothing to do with whether or not GZ reasonably believed that his life was in imminent (immediate) danger when he made the decision to shoot. ---
**Author:** ![Mgalindo13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ea5d25/32.png) [@Mgalindo13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mgalindo13)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2515 "2013-07-17T23:33:29Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > I simply don’t believe it happened like that to _George Zimmerman specifically_ because \*\*\*all \*\*\*the evidence we have for his state of mind and emotional response to his Big Adventure, in the form of witnesses, video and audio, vital signs, and his own statements then and since tell us that he did not find the even particularly traumatic at all. Especially post-shooting. So it doesn’t matter what happens to some people sometimes or even most people most of the time. There is \*no evidence at all \*that it happened to this person this time, and I’m not going to assume that it did in spite of evidence to the contrary. I’ve been endlessly berated, without foundation, for ignoring evidence, so it would be pretty funny to be told I _should_ ignore it for _this_ particular issue. > > Nope, I’m stickin’ with what the evidence and the reasonable inferences that flow from that evidence tell me about these people in this instance, not interested in suppositions, theories, hunches or other guesswork that doesn’t involve the actual evidence. > > And part of that evidence, by the way, is the way GZ’s implausibilities, inconsistencies, gaps, etc. are all centered around details crucial to determining whether he actually had a right to act in self defense and whether he actually did so. And that makes a difference. Perhaps I’m missing some pieces here, but what evidence is there that he did not find the event traumatic? Vital signs such as heart rate, blood pressure, pupil dilation and respiration start returning to normal pretty quickly, particularly in a reasonably fit male in his late 20s. Only takes about 5-7 minutes. I’m not aware of any video or audio from the time of the incident, aside from the 911 call where someone is heard screaming at the top of their lungs. Zimmerman has no special training or experience with situations like these so it’s highly unlikely he’s acclimated himself. If I’m missing something please let me know. To be clear, I’m not saying with certainty that he was in this state, though I do think it’s probable. I’m saying it’s a possibility and I don’t see how someone automatically dismisses its possibility simply because it doesn’t conform to how they think someone should act. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2516 "2013-07-17T23:42:44Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Actually it’s the difference between “you got me” and “you got me or you got it or something like that” [I’m paraphrasing] > > Anyway, the distinction is important, because your argument is as follows: > > (1) Zimmerman stated that he did not know at the time whether his shot hit Martin. > > (2) Zimmerman also stated that he heard Martin say “you got me” > > (3) After hearing “you got me,” Zimmerman would have known that his shot had hit Martin. > > (4) Therefore Zimmerman is not credible. No. **After shooting him at point blank range he would have known it hit because there was nowhere it could have conceivably gone other than into Martin** , unless he made a special effort to make sure it didn’t, because Martin made up the majority of the space in front of the gun. He aimed. He shot. Even if he didn’t hit dead center (as he pretty much did!) he would have hit Martin _somewhere_. He never even tried to claim anything that might make that believable, along the lines of “we were struggling for the gun and it went off in the struggle and I had no idea he was hit.” That is a way he could not have known. But that isn’t what he said. He said he took control of Martin, took aim, and fired. Point blank. Inches away. Directly on top of your body. Sorry. \*\*\*No way on earth \*\*\*does he _ **not** _ know he hit under those circumstances. A _first grader_ would know. Try it yourself with a non-lethal shooter..someone on top, you take aim and fire and tell me how often you miss. I’m guessing never with a toy, and absolutely never with a real gun. Then the rest is just gravy **bonus** confirmation: After hearing you got me he would have known it hit. Then after Martin turning to a compliant rag doll keeling over or letting himself be pushed he would have known it hit. Then when he climbed on him, and, as he reported in his first interview, before he said he didn’t know he hit him, heard him saying “ow ow ow” he would have known it hit. He knew he hit him. If there had been the slightest, most minor doubt, (and there wasn’t) listening to his first interview, wherein he didn’t mention a thing about it, sealed it. Zimmy’s pants went right up in flames. ---
**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 17, 2013, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2517 "2013-07-17T23:43:54Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No, not at all! > > I simply don’t believe it happened like that to _George Zimmerman specifically_ because \*\*\*all \*\*\*the evidence we have for his state of mind and emotional response to his Big Adventure, in the form of witnesses, video and audio, vital signs, and his own statements then and since tell us that he did not find the even particularly traumatic at all. Especially post-shooting. Did you read his [medical report?](http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-medical-report-sheds-light-injuries-trayvon/story?id=16353532#.UecqRk7D_IU) > [@](#): > > In addition to his physical injuries, Zimmerman complained of stress and “occasional nausea when thinking about the violence.” ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2518 "2013-07-17T23:47:44Z")
> [@Mgalindo13](#): > > To be clear, I’m not saying with certainty that he was in this state, though I do think it’s probable. I’m saying it’s a possibility and I don’t see how someone automatically dismisses its possibility simply because it doesn’t conform to how they think someone should act. We judge based on our knowledge and life experiences, out in the world and as jurors. We judge based on evidence. There is no evidence suggesting trauma. There is no claim of trauma. So, were I a juror, it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to think of possibilities for which I have no evidence. Consult all the witness statements, police station video, Zimmerman statements and medical reports. Nothing anywhere suggests trauma. So I don’t think trauma, and I shouldn’t. That would be an assumption, that would be inserting things for which there is no evidence, and that’s a no-no. ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2519 "2013-07-17T23:50:50Z")
Stoid, you’ve convinced me that it is inconceivable that he didn’t know he missed. What should I take from that? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/2520 "2013-07-17T23:51:45Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Did you read his [medical report?](http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-medical-report-sheds-light-injuries-trayvon/story?id=16353532#.UecqRk7D_IU) Yeah, well, the problem with that is that for me it’s not evidence: Zimmerman has zero credibility, especially when it comes to completely self-serving statements that are unverifiable. And because he has no credibility and I view his lies as proof of his knowledge of his guilt, every statement he makes that can’t be verified that says something entirely useful and favorable to him just works to convince me even more that he’s completely aware he’s guilty and lying as fast as he can to get out of it. And I see he’s got ADD… we ADD folks have _serious_ impulse control issues, I’m here to testify. So another mark in favor of guilt. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501.md?page=125) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501.md?page=127)