Trayvon vs. Zimmerman - The trial

[bsmooth]

If you ask me, it's pretty straightforward:

- Zimmerman was punched in the face many times
- A few of those punches resulted in Zimmerman's head hitting the ground, causing very minor cuts to the back of his head
- Based on his extensive (and recent) knowledge of Florida law on this topic, Zimmerman knew that "repeatedly punched me in the face" would not have the same legal gravity as "repeatedly slammed my head into the sidewalk"
- Zimmerman simply replaced the repeated punches to the face (which knocked his head back) with Martin grabbing his head and repeatedly driving it into the concrete, without realizing that doing that dozens of times would cause much more serious injuries than the ones he sustained

The expert today did admit in cross that the head injuries could have come from Zimmerman moving his head around to avoid being punched.

[CF DolFan]

One would actually have to do what Spider is doing to convict this man. They would have to look past the witnesses and the evidence and just "assume" they knew more than what could be proved which ironically is the exact opposite of the Casey Anthony trial. Spider's opinion is based on a lot of speculation.

-- Zimmerman was punched in the face many times - I think the facts support this.

- A few of those punches resulted in Zimmerman's head hitting the ground, causing very minor cuts to the back of his headThat's complete speculation. Many of us have hit and been hit many times in my life. I've knocked a guy out cold by hitting his head against a block wall as well beat another guy's head against asphalt. Depending on how much the other person is fighting back or how much strength I have left directly correlates to how much they get injured. In fact many people "DIE" from just one punch. Obviously most people do not die from one punch but countless others are left with broken jaws, concussions and/or permanent brain damage from just one punch. If you are being hit you have the right to defend yourself.

Anyone who trivializes being hit in the head I would challenge them to allow us to punch them in the head while trying to guess if we will stop before we do permanent damage or worse?

- Based on his extensive (and recent) knowledge of Florida law on this topic, Zimmerman knew that "repeatedly punched me in the face" would not have the same legal gravity as "repeatedly slammed my head into the sidewalk". Again very much speculation. Not saying he didn't know the basics of "stand your ground" law or even self-defense but to believe in minutes and then again 1 hour after killing someone he had the presence of mind to change specific details (screaming for help, getting his head pounded, etc) to suit his court case is doing quite a bit of assumption. In fact the first thing you would have to assume is he was in a rationale state of mind right after killing someone. That would make him almost psychotic.

- Zimmerman simply replaced the repeated punches to the face (which knocked his head back) with Martin grabbing his head and repeatedly driving it into the concrete, without realizing that doing that dozens of times would cause much more serious injuries than the ones he sustainedI've already addressed this.

Without even really trying it's been proven in court that everyone seemed to like the guy and that he had a diverse group of friends. Prosecutor's black witness who is there to point out a "television interview lie" greets George as an old friend from the stand. Georges's very black old neighbor is concerned for his well being at the time of the shooting although she realizes he just shot a black youth and as well...  confirms she believes it's his voice on the tape.

As well Trayvon's witness described him using very racist terms so it isn't much of a stretch to think the jury sees George as someone involved in the community, who has a diverse group of friends and is generally well liked while Trayvon was a troubled youth who had a mistrust of "crazy-ass crackers". For them to take that huge leap that they know more than the prosecutor's can prove seems like huge a stretch to me.

No one is overly concerned with the locals being too upset about this trial but the verdict is coming at a bad time and everyone is ramping up for it. This weekend starts the 2013 NAACP Annual Convention "We Shall Not be Moved" in Orlando. We all know troublemakers like to hide in big groups and this is a perfect opportunity for outsiders to come in stirring up trouble again. All of our churches are banding together over this thing. I really hope it doesn't turn into something stupid. If it does I'm pretty sure it won't be the Sanford people but they will be the ones to suffer from it. 

[Phishfan]

That does seem to be inconsistent with what the eyewitnesses have said.

There has been very little eyewitness testimony to the fight. The closest thing was a witness using the term ground & pound. No one saw anything.

[Pappy13]

- Based on his extensive (and recent) knowledge of Florida law on this topic, Zimmerman knew that "repeatedly punched me in the face" would not have the same legal gravity as "repeatedly slammed my head into the sidewalk". Again very much speculation. Not saying he didn't know the basics of "stand your ground" law or even self-defense but to believe in minutes and then again 1 hour after killing someone he had the presence of mind to change specific details (screaming for help, getting his head pounded, etc) to suit his court case is doing quite a bit of assumption. In fact the first thing you would have to assume is he was in a rationale state of mind right after killing someone. That would make him almost psychotic.

I agree with Spider here that it appears that Zimmerman was lieing about this, but I find it completely plausible that he would lie to the police what Martin did to him. At that time he doesn't know if he's going to be arrested and charged with murder. The fact that he lied to try to make things look more in his favor is not all that surprising to me. On the other hand, unlike Spider I do not believe that means everything he said is a lie. Quite the opposite in fact. People lie all the time especially under stressfull situations like the one that he was in. Most of what he said has been corraborated by witnesses or physical evidence. The police believed him enough to release him. There's very little evidence to disprove most of what he said. You can't convict a man of murder 2 even if he lied about some things unless there is enough evidence to prove he commited the crime he's charged with and I don't think we are anywhere close to that in this case.

I'm very interested to see if Zimmerman testifies and what he says. I'd be surprised if he sticks to his story completely and doesn't change it a bit. If he changes his story to what most of think really did happen that night I don't think it would be all that bad for him. It's one thing to lie to the police and then admit that you were lieing under oath, its something else to get up on the witness stand, take the oath and then lie. I think that would look worse for him then him simply saying that he made a mistake and Martin wasn't slamming his head into the sidewalk repeatedly, but he was punching him in the face and his head was hitting the ground. That I can believe and I can also believe that he lied to the police about it.

[Pappy13]

There has been very little eyewitness testimony to the fight. The closest thing was a witness using the term ground & pound. No one saw anything.

I thought several people have testified that they saw one person on top of the other although they weren't sure who was on top? I thought that at least one person thought they saw punches being thrown although they didn't see them them connecting with anything. Am I getting that wrong?

[Phishfan]

^^^ You are completely correct there. Your comment about inconsistencies in testimony made me think you had heard a different type of story. I'm not sure how any of this is considered inconsistent with Zimmerman's story though. I consider it more incomplete witnessing of the even. The fact that only one could say he watched enough to see punches at all means the other barely had a glance.

[Pappy13]

^^^ You are completely correct there. Your comment about inconsistencies in testimony made me think you had heard a different type of story. I'm not sure how any of this is considered inconsistent with Zimmerman's story though. I consider it more incomplete witnessing of the even. The fact that only one could say he watched enough to see punches at all means the other barely had a glance.

Couple that with the physical evidence of the injuries to Zimmerman and it seems a bit hard to believe that in addition to the punches that were witnessed by at least 1 person, Martin also slammed Zimmerman's head into the ground/sidewalk 25 times and only caused 2 cuts to his head in all of this. There's also a time issue I think. It takes far longer to grab someones head and smash it into the ground 25 times then it does to simply punch them 25 times. In all that time no one saw that happening?

Now, I have not read or heard exactly what Zimmerman told the police or said in interviews, I'm simply going by what Spider said that Zimmerman said. If he didn't say that or that's not exactly what he said then feel free to correct me.

[Spider-Dan]

In fact many people "DIE" from just one punch. Obviously most people do not die from one punch but countless others are left with broken jaws, concussions and/or permanent brain damage from just one punch. If you are being hit you have the right to defend yourself.

Anyone who trivializes being hit in the head I would challenge them to allow us to punch them in the head while trying to guess if we will stop before we do permanent damage or worse?

I've said this many times, but let me say this again:

Whether Zimmerman started the fight is extremely, crucially important.  If he did not start the fight, then Martin's actions were certainly cause for him to shoot Martin in self-defense.  If he did start the fight, Martin would have to have done a hell of a lot more than give Zimmerman a bloody nose before Zimmerman would gain cause to shoot him.

We have talked about "reasonable doubt," so let me touch on this one more time: "reasonable doubt" does not mean, "Well, Zimmerman said Martin started the fight, and no living person testifies otherwise, therefore it must be true."  Otherwise, conviction rates in this country would plummet.  The fact that Zimmerman actively stated his dismay at the thought of Martin getting away, that he was asked not to follow Martin, that (according to the detective) he followed him anyway, and that he lied about following him are all factors in determining whether a person would reasonably believe that Zimmerman attempted to physically prevent Martin from getting away.

- Based on his extensive (and recent) knowledge of Florida law on this topic, Zimmerman knew that "repeatedly punched me in the face" would not have the same legal gravity as "repeatedly slammed my head into the sidewalk". Again very much speculation. Not saying he didn't know the basics of "stand your ground" law or even self-defense but to believe in minutes and then again 1 hour after killing someone he had the presence of mind to change specific details (screaming for help, getting his head pounded, etc) to suit his court case is doing quite a bit of assumption.

You're talking about two different things.  Whether Zimmerman (a recent A student in a course on Florida self-defense law) knew that a life-threatening assault may be met with deadly force is not much of an assumption at all.  As to whether he was sophisticated enough to tailor his story, wasn't the statement with the head-pounding over an hour after the shooting, after he had already been taken to the station for questioning?  I don't recall reading anything about him relaying the head-slamming details to the officer on the scene.

Without even really trying it's been proven in court that everyone seemed to like the guy and that he had a diverse group of friends. Prosecutor's black witness who is there to point out a "television interview lie" greets George as an old friend from the stand. Georges's very black old neighbor is concerned for his well being at the time of the shooting although she realizes he just shot a black youth and as well...  confirms she believes it's his voice on the tape.

As well Trayvon's witness described him using very racist terms so it isn't much of a stretch to think the jury sees George as someone involved in the community, who has a diverse group of friends and is generally well liked while Trayvon was a troubled youth who had a mistrust of "crazy-ass crackers". For them to take that huge leap that they know more than the prosecutor's can prove seems like huge a stretch to me.

Suffice it to say that perspective colors opinion.  You place a huge amount of weight on the "creepy ass cracker" comment while placing very little weight on the "these assholes always get away" comment, while I do the opposite.  You place a huge amount of weight on Martin's suspensions from school while dismissing Zimmerman's criminal history of violence, and I do the opposite.

[Phishfan]

Spider, how many people do you know who call the police before starting a fight? How do you explain Zimmerman not stepping out of his vehicle to confront Martin, at the stage where Martin was approaching him, if his goal was a confrontation? How do you explain he caught up to a fleeing Martin if Martin had a head start on him in an effort to get home, unless Martin doubled back?

Every piece of this tells me Martin showed the more agressive behavior. None of this leads me to believe Zimmerman started the physical confrontation.

Now, I give you that maybe the use of a gun may have been overkill based on the visible injuries. That is what I would really have to focus on if I was sitting on the jury.

[Spider-Dan]

Spider, how many people do you know who call the police before starting a fight?

I imagine Zimmerman didn't think he was "starting a fight;" he likely thought this punk kid/probable criminal was going to submit to some tough talk and being firmly sat down by an authority figure.

How do you explain Zimmerman not stepping out of his vehicle to confront Martin, at the stage where Martin was approaching him, if his goal was a confrontation?

Wasn't this before he lost sight of Martin?  There would have been no need to get out of his vehicle at that point.  It was only when Martin took the back walkway path that Zimmerman needed to get out of his vehicle to pursue, and that would also dovetail with an attempt by Zimmerman physically detain Martin when he caught up to him (to keep him from getting away again).

How do you explain he caught up to a fleeing Martin if Martin had a head start on him in an effort to get home, unless Martin doubled back?

Zimmerman encountered Martin at precisely the point one would expect if Zimmerman had attempted to cut him off.  There was a map in the other thread that showed the walkway Martin took behind/through the houses; I think Zimmerman basically went around to the front of the path and backtracked through the houses (while ostensibly "looking for the street names").

edit:  here you go:



Furthermore, I don't recall reading anything that said that Martin was "fleeing" or moving with any sort of haste.  I thought Martin was meandering the whole time while talking on the phone, and simply took a path that he knew Zimmerman wouldn't be able to follow (in his car).

[CF DolFan]

We have talked about "reasonable doubt," so let me touch on this one more time: "reasonable doubt" does not mean, "Well, Zimmerman said Martin started the fight, and no living person testifies otherwise, therefore it must be true."

Unfortunately that is the law. Unless you have a way to prove it wasn't then legally you can't convict him.

Just a few bullet points off the current expert.

--said law enforcement teaches that your memory after a traumatic event doesn't return until 72 hours and some times you never remember. He said that's why people give seemingly different accounts.

--Said eye witnesses have to be taken with a grain of salt due to perspectives, stress, upbringing etc.

--said GZ negative words were reflective of his frustration towards the numerous calls and break-ins and not directed directly at TM

--said GZ showed a passiveness and timid voice reflection when TM was coming at him during the phone call and not wanting confrontation. said the fact he waited until Martin had left the area to follow again showing a tendency to avoid confrontation.

--Spoke about how draining 40 seconds of "recorded" fighting is which anyone who competes in grappling or actually fighting can attest

-- spoke about how physically inferior GZ is

This one witness is basically doing the defenses closing arguments for them
Regardless of who he is representing I love the fact he won't allow the attorneys to turn his testimony into something it's not.

[el diablo]

Spider, you are spot on. This is what I've been talking about, when I said the timing doesn't match up.
Zimmerman told detectives that he got out of his car to "look for an address". At the precise moment he tells the dispatcher on the 911 tape that, "Oh shit. He's running."
Now Zimmerman leaves his car to go in the same direction (not following) to retrieve an address on a street, where his truck is not currently parked. Detective Serrano played the 911 tape in front of GZ and asked him where he was at each point (in the 2nd police interview). Serrano then explained that it took GZ approxamently 30 sec to go from his truck to Retreat View Circle (through the cut through). He still had a min and a half from that point to his truck. GZ (in the same interview) said he went straight back to his truck. Only he never made it back. He also never relayed the address he was "looking for" to the dispatcher. The dispatched did ask him for an address to where his truck was located. One minute after GZ got out of his truck. So that would give GZ 30 sec to look for an address, on a street, where his truck wasn't parked. Again, he never got an address. Because he was still pursuing someone, he wasn't supposed to. But somehow this isn't lying. This isn't forgetting a few "minor" details. He went from following to pursuing. He knows that.  That's why he tries to explain how he wasn't "following" in the police interview. That's why he said in the Hannity interview that Trayvon "was skiping away", as opposed to running away. Because after all, all suspicious characters skip at night, in the rain.

[Spider-Dan]

Unfortunately that is the law. Unless you have a way to prove it wasn't then legally you can't convict him.

We don't live in a CSI world, where you cannot convict people without videotape evidence and DNA proof.  If Zimmerman claims that he didn't follow or instigate but nearly all the available evidence indicates otherwise, the jury is supposed to use their judgement.

--said GZ negative words were reflective of his frustration towards the numerous calls and break-ins and not directed directly at TM

Can't you apply that same standard toward Martin's exasperation at being racially profiled?

[Phishfan]

As for your diagram, I beleive it is not very accurate because #1 it admits to saying assumed path and #2 I beleive courtroom testimony points to the encounter happening much closer to the T area than the diagram shows.

As for not hearing anything about Martin hurrying along, I'm pretty sure that was the testimony of the girl he was on the phone with.

[Spider-Dan]

Assumed path is assumed, of course.  Zimmerman claims that he was only looking for street names, which doesn't exactly explain why he was between the houses in the first place.

As for the shooting location, seems pretty consistent to me:






It does look like the first map I posted has Zimmerman's truck much further back than it actually was, though.