# The Zimmerman/Martin case. Why so cleanly divided between the parties? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 28, 2012, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036 "2012-03-28T13:11:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/221 "2012-04-05T04:48:02Z")
> [@Dr.Colossus](#): > > so you are saying that had this gone the other way, and zimmerman was dead because he was unarmed and martin was armed, that martin would be totally in the right? If Martin had reasonable fear for his life, and he killed Zimmerman, yes. That’s not what just I am saying. That’s what the law says. > [@](#): > > are you saying zimmerman was in the right? Evidence so far points that way, if the prosecutor or, if it comes to that, the jury agrees that he had reasonable fear for his life. Again, that’s what the law says. Unless your “totally in the right” is asked not in a legal sense but in some other sense. Can you clarify? Because if you’re arguing morality and not legality, you have to discuss it with someone else. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/222 "2012-04-05T04:49:28Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Once again is what the police said, and once again it is clear that other witnesses that did not agree with that were ignored. Just admit that your statement: “but one has to notice that the reporter is not telling us that the reporter confirmed that contact with the authorities, so it is hearsay so far” was wrong and say thank you for the information. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/223 "2012-04-05T04:51:02Z")
> [@Dr.Colossus](#): > > also, if zimmerman is convicted, are you going to be around to admit you were wrong? Sure. If he walks, will you be around to admit you were? Somehow I suspect you won’t admit that. But I could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/224 "2012-04-05T04:53:28Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Just admit that your statement: “but one has to notice that the reporter is not telling us that the reporter confirmed that contact with the authorities, so it is hearsay so far” was wrong and say thank you for the information. Not so far, read the report you cited first and you would see no confirmation that the witness contacted the authorities, we just have to trust that he did. And I have seen reports that the area the final confrontation took place was not lighted and it was getting dark. Not sure I would rely on what he said, \*\*if \*\*he said so. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Colossus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.colossus/32/9423_2.png) [@Dr.Colossus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Colossus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/225 "2012-04-05T04:56:01Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Sure. If he walks, will you be around to admit you were? Somehow I suspect you won’t admit that. But I could be wrong. you certainly could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/226 "2012-04-05T05:42:30Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Not so far, read the report you cited first and you would see no confirmation that the witness contacted the authorities, we just have to trust that he did. I gave you another one, same media company, that says he did. You ignored it. Why? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/227 "2012-04-05T05:48:06Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > I gave you another one, same media company, that says he did. You ignored it. Why? Same media company indeed. And it was FOX, weasel words are too numerous there. ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/228 "2012-04-05T05:56:12Z")
**Terr** ’s golden witness, “}ohn”, supposedly “saw it all” and yet Detective Serino didn’t believe Zimmerman’s story. How can that seeming contradiction be reconciled? Firstly, according to the linked article, the witness not only did not see it all, but there were gaps in what he did see as he moved around the interior of his house. He did not witness the initiation of the confrontation. Secondly, he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman,(administering what Zim fans describe as a savage beating… that somehow did very little damage), which could mean Martin was the aggressor or simply that he had the temerity to fight back. Hardly the prize witness that Fox sensationalized. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/229 "2012-04-05T06:00:26Z")
And then if one insists on unnamed witnesses, it is clear that there are still others contradicting Zimmerman and the Police: > **[Trayvon Eyewitness: Zimmerman Was Uninjured](https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/trayvon-martin-eyewitness-zimmerman-was-uninjured/329916/)** > > An eyewitness to Trayvon Martin's killing appeared on Anderson Cooper's AC360 on CNN last night and said that George Zimmerman appeared to walk away from the scuffle uninjured but, "very worried," casting more doubt on Zimmerman's self-defense... > [@](#): > > Earlier this week, police video of a seemingly unharmed Zimmerman drew attention. And now, there’s an eyewitness account to go along with those images. The witness, whose name and identity were withheld, told Anderson Cooper last night: > > > [@](#): > > > > I don’t know if was an echo but it definitely made more than one pop … After the larger man got off there was a boy, obviously now dead, on the ground facing down… > > > > ``` > > It was dark. I can't say I watched him get up, but in a couple of seconds or so he was walking towards where I was watching and I could see him a little bit clearer. It was a Hispanic man. He didn't appear hurt or anything else. He just kind of seemed very worried with his hand up to his forehead. > > > > ``` > > The witness also added that he saw no blood and that the confrontation took place on grass, contradicting the claim that Zimmerman was wounded in the back of the head because Martin was slamming his head into the pavement. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/230 "2012-04-05T14:16:37Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And then if one insists on unnamed witnesses, it is clear that there are still others contradicting Zimmerman and the Police: > > [Trayvon Eyewitness: Zimmerman Was Uninjured - The Atlantic](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/03/trayvon-martin-eyewitness-zimmerman-was-uninjured/50543/) We’ve gone through this witness’s testimony: 1. He didn’t know which man was on top of the other: Anderson Cooper: “You say the shooter was on top?” Witness: “I can’t really say.” [http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-29/justice/justice\_florida-teen-shooting\_1\_witness-voices-window?\_s=PM:JUSTICE](http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-29/justice/justice_florida-teen-shooting_1_witness-voices-window?_s=PM:JUSTICE) And then the next time I looked out the window, there’s the same thing: two men on the grass, one on top of each other. But the witness recalled not having been able to see clearly which man was on top because it was dark. 1. He didn’t see Zimmerman get up: > **[Trayvon Martin killing: witness says he saw Zimmerman walk away uninjured](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/30/trayvon-martin-witness-zimmerman-uninjured)** > > Account contradicts allegation from Zimmerman's father that Trayvon Martin left his son with injuries including a broken nose It was dark. I can’t say I watched him get up, but in a couple of seconds or so he was walking towards where I was watching and I could see him a little bit clearer. ====================== So - can you show me where exactly his testimony contradicts “Zimmerman and the police”? The fact that he couldn’t see injuries on Zimmerman? Couldn’t see doesn’t equal “there were no injuries”. For that you would have to see the EMT report. When it comes out, I am sure it will satisfy your curiosity. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/231 "2012-04-05T14:25:39Z")
> [@Dr.Colossus](#): > > you are the squirreliest. Again, _you are not allowed to insult other posters._ ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/232 "2012-04-05T15:34:33Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > We’ve gone through this witness’s testimony: > > 1. He didn’t know which man was on top of the other: > > Anderson Cooper: “You say the shooter was on top?” > Witness: “I can’t really say.” > > [http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-29/justice/justice\_florida-teen-shooting\_1\_witness-voices-window?\_s=PM:JUSTICE](http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-29/justice/justice_florida-teen-shooting_1_witness-voices-window?_s=PM:JUSTICE) > > And then the next time I looked out the window, there’s the same thing: two men on the grass, one on top of each other. > > But the witness recalled not having been able to see clearly which man was on top because it was dark. > > 1. He didn’t see Zimmerman get up: > > [Trayvon Martin killing: witness says he saw Zimmerman walk away uninjured | Trayvon Martin | The Guardian](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/30/trayvon-martin-witness-zimmerman-uninjured) > > It was dark. I can’t say I watched him get up, but in a couple of seconds or so he was walking towards where I was watching and I could see him a little bit clearer. > > ====================== > > So - can you show me where exactly his testimony contradicts “Zimmerman and the police”? The fact that he couldn’t see injuries on Zimmerman? Couldn’t see doesn’t equal “there were no injuries”. For that you would have to see the EMT report. When it comes out, I am sure it will satisfy your curiosity. Simple logic, this testimony and others throws doubt on the idea that the anonymous witness saw who was on top. It also gives evidence to the idea that Zimmerman was not wounded and it contradicts his testimony that he was wounded on the pavement, as even Bricker posted, there is the possibility that when faced with years of prison for Manslaughter, a perpetrator could apply some self inflicted wounds after the altercation to have an excuse. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/233 "2012-04-05T16:27:38Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Simple logic, this testimony and others throws doubt on the idea that the anonymous witness saw who was on top. How? Because the second one couldn’t tell who was on top? That’s not simple logic. That’s reaching for straws. > [@](#): > > It also gives evidence to the idea that Zimmerman was not wounded and it contradicts his testimony that he was wounded on the pavement, as even Bricker posted, there is the possibility that when faced with years of prison for Manslaughter, a perpetrator could apply some self inflicted wounds after the altercation to have an excuse. Good luck proving that. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/234 "2012-04-05T16:36:34Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > How? Because the second one couldn’t tell who was on top? That’s not simple logic. That’s reaching for straws. As several other witnesses and the one last quoted report, it was too dark to make up who was on top, insisting that we should ignore that important item \*\*is \*\*reaching for the straw. > [@Terr](#): > > Good luck proving that. As the latest testimony shows, Zimmerman was either not wounded, or he was after the shooting took place. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/235 "2012-04-05T16:40:21Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Good luck proving that. Wouldn’t have been that difficult if a thorough investigation was performed immediately. Lacerations from concrete would have ragged edges and be full of dirt. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/236 "2012-04-05T16:41:16Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > As several other witnesses and the one last quoted report, it was too dark to make up who was on top, insisting that we should ignore that important item \*\*is \*\*reaching for the straw. Were all the eyewitnesses standing in the same spot? At the same distance from Zimmerman/Martin? > [@](#): > > As the latest testimony shows, Zimmerman was either not wounded, or he was after the shooting took place. “Didn’t see injuries” (at a distance, in the dark) doesn’t equal “there were no injuries”. Any lawyer in the courtroom would make mincemeat of that kind of logic. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/237 "2012-04-05T16:42:27Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Wouldn’t have been that difficult if a thorough investigation was performed immediately. Lacerations from concrete would have ragged edges and be full of dirt. You (and I) have not seen the EMT report. Or the pictures the police took of Zimmerman immediately after. What other “thorough investigation” was missed? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/238 "2012-04-05T16:45:22Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > You (and I) have not seen the EMT report. Or the pictures the police took of Zimmerman immediately after. What other “thorough investigation” was missed? True, but if the wounds exist and are consistent with Zimmerman’s story, the EMT’s record and police report will reflect that. Thus, **GIGO’s** (admittedly rather unlikely) suggestion that any wounds were self-inflicted will be easy to prove. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/239 "2012-04-05T17:03:57Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Were all the eyewitnesses standing in the same spot? At the same distance from Zimmerman/Martin? > “Didn’t see injuries” (at a distance, in the dark) doesn’t equal “there were no injuries”. Any lawyer in the courtroom would make mincemeat of that kind of logic. And of course there is no contradiction on insisting it was too dark and the reliability of the “john” witness. None. :rolleyes: A quick check of the testimony shows that Zimmerman approached the latest witness, if one is willing to then doubt on that because there was little light, then there is even more reason to dismiss the early testimony of the “john” one. ---
**Author:** ![Woodenspoon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/bc79bd/32.png) [@Woodenspoon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Woodenspoon)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2012, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036/240 "2012-04-07T01:26:51Z")
> **[Shelby Steele: The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303302504577323691134926300)** > > In The Wall Street Journal, Shelby Steele writes that the absurdity of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in their use of Trayvon Martin is that they want to make a movement out of an anomaly. Black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-zimmerman-martin-case-why-so-cleanly-divided-between-the-parties/617036.md?page=13)