Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[McHell]

I'm not convinced that he actually left the area around the T. The point is that Zimmerman and Martin both had a legitimate purpose in a common area. Neither had an obligation to leave. The question is set up to elicit a response that Martin should have done this, to which the racial grievance cultists add because he was black.

Martin had no legal or moral obligation to leave the common area because Zimmerman was there. Marin did have a legal and moral obligation to not break Zimmerman's nose, mount him and continue to drive his head into the concrete sidewalk to the point that he one planted in his chest.

It's not a hard question, really.

I agree entirely with your first point as to neither having an obligation to leave the common area, and I think it was well put.

But as to your point about breaking Zimmerman's nose and driving his head into the concrete - I call BS on this.

First and most importantly, the injuries by themselves prove little to nothing - because they are just as consistent with Martin defending himself from Zimmerman who may accosted him on some way, as they are with Martin attacking an innocent unsuspecting Zimmerman. The only corroboration as to whether it was Martin defending himself or Martin attacking Zimmerman is Zimmerman's own statements which are full of gaping holes, contradictions, and some pretty absurd excuses. Nobody claims to have seen the start of the physical confrontation either, so it's not like we have reliable witnesses to draw from.

Also, the physical evidence simply does not support this narrative about being seriously beaten. As to the nose, there was never any definitive diagnosis or confirmation that it was actually broken because Zimmerman never bothered to follow up on the imaging referral. Also, we know from pictures that the swelling subsided very quickly. As to the minor lacerations on the back of his head, they were so insignificant that they literally did not even require a single band-aid. Just a few minutes after the alleged life-or-death fight ended, the EMTs on scene administered a test to check for signs of head injuries and they found nothing that caused any concern; he scored a 15 out of 15 on the Glasgow Coma Scale. They checked his vital signs and they were within normal range. In terms of "treatment", they merely wiped him off with peroxide and sent him on his way. He never sought nor required any additional treatment after that.

Say what you will, but the injuries were utterly insignificant and most certainly were not even in the ballpark of causing serious bodily harm or death. I don't see how anyone can say the physical evidence is consistent with Zimmerman's narrative.

Stack on top of all this that Martin's autopsy revealed a complete lack of any corroborating evidence of this alleged life-or-death struggle, and it becomes near impossible to believe Zimmerman's tall tale.

 

[johnny karate]

Uhh...no.

Assuming for argument that Martin was trying to act in legitimate self-defense as opposed to a criminal motive of revenge, they are not standing on the same ground.

Martin would be presumably acting on the perception of being observed and followed in a common area. Zimmerman was acting on the reality of being punched in the face, mounted and having his head driven into a concrete sidewalk.

No double standard necessary.

Apparently, people are just going to repeat the same unproven assertions over and over again instead having an actual discussion of the facts.

 

[McHell]

I think you are way closer to the conceivable side than plausible side.

He had a flashlight - his phone.

GZ should have stayed in the truck. TM should have gone home.

Agreed as to your last point.

Can you point out any specific details in the examples I presented that would lead you to believe they are implausible? What do you think about the narrative that says Martin deliberately either laid in wait or turned back in order to confront Zimmerman - is that closer to plausible or merely conceivable in your opinion?

About Martin's phone being a flashlight... that seems a bit of a stretch. As in closer to the merely conceivable than plausible. Assuming that he would have even thought of that at the time, it would not have been very effective given the type of phone.

 

[McHell]

Revenge for what?

You're assuming that Martin assaulted Zimmerman first. We have no evidence of this (or the reverse).

Not to quibble, but I would argue that we do have some fairly compelling evidence of the reverse, in that there is some good evidence to show that Zimmerman's version of how the confrontation started and unfolded is untrue. I'm talking about both physical evidence and witness testimony.

We can't definitively prove anything of course, but it's also not like a toss-up or a coin-flip or anything. Not even close. The evidence weighs very heavily on the side of Zimmerman being responsible for provoking the physical confrontation, IMO, and so (INAL but) I believe a manslaughter conviction would have been the correct application of the law.

 

[Mumbles]

Yet he did quit the area, at running speed. And the claim has been made that he did so because he was frightened.

The question then becomes... Why did he return to the exact spot which he had supposedly fled in fear four minutes and 7 seconds earlier?

The most obvious answer - and the answer supported by the location of his body - is "He didn't."

 

[Mumbles]

Apparently, people are just going to repeat the same unproven assertions over and over again instead having an actual discussion of the facts.

Indeed. Let's go over the evidence yet again.

Zimmerman found Martin suspicious, because Martin was black, and in front of a particular house. This is not a matter of dispute, Zimmerman's own defense team said so.

Martin walked by Zimmerman, and took no action against him. Again, not in dispute, Zimmerman himself said so.

Zimmerman followed Martin in his car. Not in dispute, Zimmerman said so.

At some point, Zimmerman got out of his car and chased Martin on foot. Again, not in dispute, Zimmerman said so.

Martin's body was found roughly 30 feet down an alley, away from where Zimmerman's car was supposedly parked, and moving towards the house where Martin was saying. Not in dispute, the evidence says so.

Zimmerman suffered no serious injuries, despite his story of being repeatedly rendered almost unconscious. Disputed solely by a witness for Zimmerman, and with a strong qualifier, and who did not examine Zimmerman at the time.

Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. Not in dispute, Zimmerman admitted to it.

Zimmerman was perfectly fine after shooting Martin. Not in dispute, Zimemrman said so, as did all witnesses.

Now, I see no way to get from there, to "Zimmerman was almost killed by a violent Trayvon Martin", aside from "Well, Martin was black, so he must have been angry and violent and super strong."

...except, if he had been super strong, Zimmerman would be dead.

 

[Cylinder]

Zimmerman found Martin suspicious, because Martin was black, and in front of a particular house. This is not a matter of dispute, Zimmerman's own defense team said so.

Yea, I think we're gonna need a cite for that. TIA.

 

[Mumbles]

Yea, I think we're gonna need a cite for that. TIA.

Sigh. Okay.

Here, throughout the questioning, is the defense questioning Olivia Bertalan about some break in by two black men. And they actually go to great lengths to note that one of the men involved in the robbery was nowhere to be found in this case.

Here, at roughly 42:00, is the defense asserting that, since the people involved in the break in were young black men, and Martin was a young black man, he "matched the description".

Again, not in dispute. And really, Bertalan is otherwise of no relevance, so there was no reason for her to even be questioned, aside from the traits (young, black, male) that Martin shared with the people who broke into her home.

 

[Cylinder]

I would suggest that fits the description of a previous crime and was black are not the same thing. Bertalan's testimony provided the background for why Zimmerman stepped forward when the community along with the city started a neighborhood watch program and a human reason why that was important.

 

[WildCat]

We have only Zimmerman's account of what preceded that. Suppose Zimmerman had grabbed Martin and tried to keep him from getting away?

There's the speculation again, offered without a single shred of evidence.

 

[WildCat]

Legally, yes.

I do not, however, have any illusions that the verdict implies that he is innocent in actuality.

Do you have illusions that thinking that Zimmerman grabbed Martin is not pure speculation without a shred of evidence?

 

[WildCat]

But Martin didn't have a legal obligation to run, and he may not have known that Zimmerman was armed (as far as I recall). Didn't Martin have the right to stand his ground?

Stand his ground against what? What crime was Zimmerman committing?

Do you realize that SYG laws only mean you have no duty to retreat from someone intent on committing a crime against you?

We also know that of the 2, only Zimmerman called the police. And as Psiload mentioned in the 4 minutes and 7 seconds that elapsed after Zimmerman said "he ran" Zimmerman only ventured a few dozen feet to the T, which is where the incident occurred. Wherever Martin "ran", it wasn't far.

It's not like Martin didn't have a phone with which to call the police, because he did. He chose not to, because he didn't want police to be there. Zimmerman did.

 

[Bob001]

There's the speculation again, offered without a single shred of evidence.

By his own account, Zimmerman was following someone that he regarded as suspicious, and he was packing heat, likely boosting his "neighborhood protector" self-image. The only person who could provide a shred of evidence -- maybe much more -- against him is dead.

 

[WildCat]

By his own account, Zimmerman was following someone that he regarded as suspicious, and he was packing heat, likely boosting his "neighborhood protector" self-image. The only person who could provide a shred of evidence -- maybe much more -- against him is dead.

Then you admit you don't even have a shred of evidence.

And dead people do tell tales. We know from his phone records that he chose to talk to his friend instead of calling the police, so it's safe to assume he wasn't afraid of that 'creepy ass cracker". We know he either didn't run far or returned to confront Zimmerman since over 4 minutes elapsed from the time of him running to the confrontation nearby. We know he had no injuries consistent with being hit, and his knuckles were bruised the same way they'd be had he hit someone. We know the shot was at very close range and the trajectory of the bullet.

Through forensics, dead men do tell tales.

 

[Upchurch]

Do you have illusions that thinking that Zimmerman grabbed Martin is not pure speculation without a shred of evidence?

No. Do you have any illusions that thinking Martin attacked Zimmerman first is not also pure speculation without a shred of evidence?

 

[Upchurch]

We know he had no injuries consistent with being hit, and his knuckles were bruised the same way they'd be had he hit someone.

We also know that injuries or even being hit is not a requirement for being assaulted. Although some of us may choose to forget these things when they don't fit our preferred conclusion.

 

[McHell]

Stand his ground against what? What crime was Zimmerman committing?

Do you realize that SYG laws only mean you have no duty to retreat from someone intent on committing a crime against you?

INAL, but I'm pretty sure that's not exactly what Florida law says or means in this case. There is a subtle but critical distinction that you seem to be missing, unless I have misunderstood you. Whereas you seem to be saying that one only has a right to self defense if the other person actually has intent to comit a crime - Florida law seems to pivot on the concept of reasonable belief, which does not depend upon or require actual intent.

In other words, Florida law says Martin would have been legally justified in using (at least) non-lethal force (e.g., a punch in the nose) if he reasonably believed such was necessary to defend himself from Zimmerman's imminent (i.e., not actual) use of unlawful force on him. That would still be true regardless of whether or not Zimmerman actually intended any harm. It's down to reasonable believe, not actual intent.

The same point holds for Zimmerman as well, although there are some differences between the requirements for lethal versus non-lethal force. Whether or not Martin actually had any intentions to harm is almost irrelevant in a certain way; the whole thing comes down to whether or not a jury decides that Zimmerman had a reasonable belief that pulling the trigger was necessary to prevent his own death or great bodily harm. Note that his subjective fear is not enough, rather it must be decided by the jury whether or not it met the standards and rose to the level of a reasonable belief.

Again, INAL so take my interpretation for what it's worth.

 

[McHell]

We have only Zimmerman's account of what preceded that. Suppose Zimmerman had grabbed Martin and tried to keep him from getting away?

There's the speculation again, offered without a single shred of evidence.

I don't claim to have the evidence you're asking for, but I wonder if you would be at all interested or moved by a simple demonstration that Zimmerman almost surely lied to detectives about how and/or where the fight began? This can (IMO at least) be done using only Zimmerman's own recorded statements as compared with some of the physical evidence.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Agreed as to your last point.

Can you point out any specific details in the examples I presented that would lead you to believe they are implausible?

Sure, we can go over everything again ad nauseum, but to what end ?

There isn't any new evidence. I've already come to my conclusions, you to yours.

There is no reason to believe the timeline while GZ was on the NEN isn't accurate. Sure, he could be lying about where he was, or whether he really lost site of TM, etc., but I am not aware of any reason to believe that's the case - so TM had plenty of time to go 300 feet to brandys house if he wanted to. The conclusion is he didn't want to.

I simply don't believe TM was scared - that's not what his texts, photos, actions at school, actions at home, lead me to believe.

What do you think about the narrative that says Martin deliberately either laid in wait or turned back in order to confront Zimmerman - is that closer to plausible or merely conceivable in your opinion?

I think that's closer to conceivable than plausible.

It's also conceivable he ran home and and then back up towards the sidewalk. I don't see any evidence that happened, but it's conceivable. Not very plausible.

About Martin's phone being a flashlight... that seems a bit of a stretch. As in closer to the merely conceivable than plausible. Assuming that he would have even thought of that at the time, it would not have been very effective given the type of phone.

Meh. I used to own that phone. There's no 'stretch' at at all about installing a flashlight widget or app and using it as an 'effective' flashlight.

 

[Upchurch]

Stand his ground against what? What crime was Zimmerman committing?

Possibly assault. We can't know for sure.

It's not like Martin didn't have a phone with which to call the police, because he did. He chose not to, because he didn't want police to be there. Zimmerman did.

Yeah, because black kids in Florida, or in the US in general, have confidence that they can get help from the police.

Are you completely unaware of history, modern social media, or the news? The protests here in the greater St. Louis area may be new, but the social forces behind them go back decades and centuries. In what universe would Martin have an expectation that the police would make the situation better for him?