May 19 2012

Latest Evidence Indicates Again Zimmerman The Aggressor, And Therefore Cannot Claim Self Defense

Published by at 10:05 am under All General Discussions,Trayvon Martin Case

Since everyone has made up their mind and is closed to new evidence and logic, this post is about useful as tits on a boar hog (one of my Dad’s favorite sayings). But in good conscience I need to point out why the evidence continues to point to a likely guilty verdict in any trial (jury or judge).

Remember that Zimmerman made his statements to police without realizing there was a witness on the phone with Trayvon, so he has put out statements now demonstrably false (assuming all testimony is of equal weight – which it is at this point). He wove a tale of self defense on the spot. The more holes in Zimmerman’s statements, the more credibility he loses while other witnesses gain or stay the same.

So let’s go to the first problem in Zimmerman’s statements – the lost house number:

Zimmerman claims he got out of his vehicle to find a house number to let police know where he saw the allegedly suspicious person, and while returning to his car was knocked down by a punch in the nose and attacked by Martin.

If this is an accurate portrayal of what Zimmerman said, he really is in deep trouble. In the map below we see where people think Zimmerman’s truck was parked (C) when he got out to chase Martin. There are tons of house numbers in view of his truck across the street, and then straight ahead before you go behind and in between the buildings. If Zimmerman did go to point E and then F, he was not looking for house numbers.

The most damning part of the evidence now released is how Zimmerman not only profiled and judged Martin in a split second (and here I do not mean racial profiling, but simply looked at the kid and determined he was a criminal from his clothes and the fact he was in Zimmerman’s neighborhood), but stalked him. An armed man stalking a kid based on fantasies concocted in his head.

Here is what Trayvon’s friend on the phone has stated happened:

An unnamed girl, the one identified by the Martin family attorney as Trayvon’s girlfriend, may be one of the case’s most important witnesses. She told prosecutors that she and Trayvon talked by cellphone on and off as he went to the store that evening.

She said Trayvon told her a white man in a vehicle was watching him. Trayvon started walking, and the call cut off, she said. When she called back, “he said this man is still following him.”

The girl said Trayvon started running, “and then he said he lost him [Zimmerman],” she said, adding that the teen’s “voice kind of changed … I could tell he was scared. And in a couple minutes, he said a man’s following him again.”

She said Trayvon asked, “Why are you following me for?” and a man’s voice said, “What are you doing around here?” Then she heard a noise, and the call cut off.

This does not fit Zimmerman’s statements whatsoever. Martin is scared and running from a man stalking him. He even loses him. But Zimmerman’s hunt for house numbers apparently took him far afield. Also note how Zimmerman is not ambushed. Martin tells his friend on the phone how the guy keeps coming TOWARDS him.

And this is where Zimmerman loses the right to self defense and becomes a reckless fool with a gun. The Florida  ‘stand your ground law’ has some very interesting exceptions:

While the law also states that the defense “is not available to a person who initially provokes the use of force against himself,” there are 2 exceptions. First, if:

“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.”

The law does not allow someone to instigate an altercation, start to lose the altercation and then claim self defense. But moreover, it clearly states anyone wishing to withdraw has to be allowed to do so. The section I emphasized applies to Martin and Zimmerman equally. When Martin ran from Zimmerman and tried to lose him, it is clear he doing all he can to withdraw.

People naively think Zimmerman has all the rights to self defense here.

Martin has every right to be where he was:

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

This is where Zimmerman crossed the line (many times over). He thought he could confront Martin with the threat or use of force. He cannot. He was reckless and got into a fight because he was reckless. Without Zimmerman there  is not death.

Apparently there are witnesses the bolster the idea Zimmerman went gunning for Trayvon:

According to ABC News, the woman, only identified as witness 5, told investigators “I do honestly feel that he (Zimmerman) intended for this kid (Martin) to die… If you’re in self defense, shoot him in the leg. He’s a 17 year old, scrawny little kid. You get into a physical fight with him… I think the kid was running for help.”

He said Zimmerman was, “…more like, talking like he was having a hard time, looked like he just got his butt whipped… not like he was in shock, not like, ‘I can’t believe I just shot someone,’ but like, ‘Just ell my wife I just shot someone,’ like it was nothing.”

I too have had a real problem with where the shot was aimed. A shot to the leg or arm would be enough.

Finally, the small scrapes on Travyon’s knuckle (or knuckles depending on the story) cannot be from Zimmerman’s nose. More than likely Trayvon missed once or twice (I assume Zimmerman dodged his head) and hit the pavement behind him. Or he could have slipped if he was pushing Zimmerman’s head on the pavement. But the only way to rip knuckles is on teeth, and Zimmerman did not have any fat lip, etc.

And to the THC – forget about it. It makes people mellow. All the crap written about that aspect of this is just that – crap. It is no more a factor than a beer drank the day before.

42 responses so far

42 Responses to “Latest Evidence Indicates Again Zimmerman The Aggressor, And Therefore Cannot Claim Self Defense”

  1. AJStrata says:


    You know the law? Is Dee Dee’s testimony out of bounds?

    yes or no please.

    As you know, the law provides for both sides to make a case and let a jury decide on the evidence. So far I have been looking at the information available and making a case.

    Blowhard? No – first amendment my friend. First amendment.

  2. AJStrata says:

    BTW, WWS – you call me bigot for having a lucid opinion backed up by sound arguments?

    Take a hike,

  3. Layman says:

    AJ, you still have not answered the question I’ve asked of you – twice. No mater how they got to the point, once Martin was on top of Zimmerman pounding his head into the sidewalk, what was GZ supposed to do?

    And one more thing, how does one shoot a guy in the leg who is straddling you and pounding your head into the ground?

  4. jan says:


    About the only way Zimmerman could have shot Martin in the leg is if he was standing, or at least laying on the ground, some distance from him. But, as witnesses have said, one person was straddling the other, so the shot made was one at close range with little ability to maneuver the gun so you could wound only an appendage. I’ve read accounts where the shot was probably made directly against Trayvon’s chest, in which he was wearing both a sweatshirt covered up by a hoodie sweatshirt.

    Anyway, by the amount of posting on this subject, as well as the passion involved in everyone’s interpretation of what happened, this is an event that has captured the attention of those on all sides of the issue. Whether Zimmerman is found innocent, guilty or somewhere inbetween, there are going to be people who will be unhappy with the outcome.

  5. Layman says:

    And one other question…

    If Martin was running away from Zimmerman how come he never made it home? I estimate (based on some basic assumptions about the property) the distance he needed to cover was a little more than a quarter mile. A slow walk (3mph) covers that in 5 minutes. A brisk walk (4mph) in less than 4. A slow jog (5mph) in 3. A brisk jog (6mph) in 2.5. An all out run from a fit youth in fear for his life – less than 2 minutes.

    You’re the numbers guy AJ. If you believe Dee Dee’s tesimony then explain it. Something doesn’t add up.

  6. Redteam says:

    Layman, when Martin attacked Zimmerman, it occurred about 70 yards from Martin’s father’s girlfriends apartment, about 10 to 15 seconds (good sprinters do 100 yards in 10 seconds) away if running. Martin had plenty of time to get all the way to the apartment before Zimmerman ever got to point E. but, he actually did get to the apartment, but he came back to point F when he saw zimmerman returning to his truck and that is where he confronted zimmerman. If DeeDee could testify to what she knows, I’m sure that’s what she would say, except she’s not interested in saying anything. At least she wasn’t for over 6 weeks after it all happened.
    I think what happened is Martin’s earphones fell off from him running so hard trying to escape and Martin stopped to find them, it apparently took him about 3 or more minutes to find them at which time he put them in his pocket. He then was talking on his cell phone without earphones so he was having to hold his phone up to his ear, this was such a visable act that zimmerman saw he was on the phone so he knew there was a witness on the other end, but I guess zimmerman was so crazed and out of controll waving his gun all around that it scared Martin and Martin then hit zimmerman in the nose, grazing his knuckles on the gun or something. Anyhow, I think the gun fell and they fought over it and finally zimmerman was lucky enough to get a hold of it first and he then shot Martin. Or something. At least it sounds reasonable with all the evidence we’ve seen. Or something.

  7. jan says:

    More info on this Dee Dee: Beyond a reasonal doubt

    THE TIMES ON DEE-DEE: The NY Times describes Trayvon Martin’s call with his girlfriend and includes this bit of amusement as to how she was discovered:

    Several weeks after Mr. Martin’s death, his father, Tracy, discovered that his son had been talking to the girl just before he was shot. He learned this by reviewing Mr. Martin’s phone bills. She was subsequently interviewed by the Martin family’s lawyer, Benjamin L. Crump, but not by the Sanford police.

    Uh huh. Several days after the shooting (I recall March 5 from the evidence file but can’t look it up just now) the Sanford PD contacted Mr. Martin and asked for their wireless plan PIN so they could access Martin’s phone records. Mr. Martin said he would take their request up with his lawyers, and that is where the Sanford PD drop out of the story, as weeks weeks went by with no apparent action on the cell phone front.

    But by happy coincidence, the girlfriend was discovered a day or two after the 911 phone calls were made public. Did the information in those calls aid her recollection? We will never know.

    This supposed ‘girlfriend’ does not seem like an air-tight, nor an unbiased witness, by any means.

  8. AJStrata says:


    If you read the articles I linked to you wold know the battery in he phone was dead. And when asked for the password none of the parents knew it (like I don’t know my kids passwords). It took weeks to break into the phone. The police did not need the parents’ permission.

    Facts of life. And your arguments have no bearing on the evidence. Evidence is discovered late all the time.

    You’re grasping

  9. AJStrata says:


    Contrary to RT fantasies about what happened, Martin does not need to go home. And he thought he lost Zimmermna – which he did. It it one of many reasons Zimmerman’s rushed alibi – concocted on the scene – is falling apart. Zimmerman confronted Martin and initiated the final act in this deadly play.

    The more evidence comes out, the weaker Zimmerman’s case gets. So all those open minds need to note the new information as new – and get rid of the things made up when there was less information.

  10. […] had a long time reader call me a bigot and tell me I should not comment on the case anymore – he wants me to give up my 1st […]

  11. jan says:

    “If you read the articles I linked to you wold know the battery in he phone was dead. And when asked for the password none of the parents knew it (like I don’t know my kids passwords). It took weeks to break into the phone. The police did not need the parents’ permission.”

    AJ, the reason I posted the info about the cell phone, which led to Dee Dee’s phone interaction with Martin, is that she apparently talked with Martin’s attorney before she talked with the police. That to me seems like a backward’s act. So, not only was her narrative, on what happened, delayed, which tends to blurr the facts, but it had also gone through the filter of the victim’s attorney. It’s like ‘bleaching’ what she had to say prior to the police taking down her story of the events that night.

    Wonder if Zimmerman had told his story to his lawyer before talking to the police? Wouldn’t there be suspicions that the attorney might have coached the witness, which taints the authenticity of whatever testimony was offered?

  12. Redteam says:

    I don’t think the police were too concerned about who Martin was talking to at the time because the case appeared to be fairly clear as to what happened and because it was unlikely that who ever he was talking to could add any material facts to the case (which she didn’t)

    This happened Feb 26, Martin’s father found DeeDee’s phone number after Mar 18 and Crump attempted to talk with her on the 19th. She may or may not have discussed the story with him. The Federal investigator then took a statement from her on Apr 2, or 3. We do know that she certainly had time to ‘get her story straight’. (which has changed some since that time)

    I like this statement from AJ, just above:
    “Martin does not need to go home. And he thought he lost Zimmermna – which he did. It it one of many reasons Zimmerman’s rushed alibi – concocted on the scene – is falling apart. Zimmerman confronted Martin ”

    Let’s apply a little scientific training to this:
    “he thought he lost Zimmermna – which he did.”
    ” Zimmerman confronted Martin ”
    on second thought, nevermind…

  13. Layman says:

    AJ: Just trying to apply logic. TM is headed home. He fears because a strange white guy (GZ) is after him. He runs away and “loses” said white guy. Then instead of continuing home he doubles back to check if the stanger who put fear into him is still there.

    It doesn’t make sense. You’re right AJ, TM was under no requirement to go home. but if that is where he was heading, and if he was afraid of GZ, then why didn’t he continue home.

    The fatal encounter took place nowhere near the townhouse. Either Trayvon doubled back to confront Zimmerman or he wasn’t headed home and was the victim of some very bad luck/timing.

    Either way, asking the question is not engaging in fantasy.

  14. Frogg1 says:

    Could an unarmed Trayvon Martin have killed George Zimmerman?

    “It happens more than twice a day, on average. Fists and feet were responsible for 745 murders in 2010, or 5.7 percent of all murders that year, according to FBI statistics. (The data on this have been remarkably stable in recent years. In the five preceding years, the percentage of murders perpetrated by fists or feet fluctuated between 5.6 and 6.1.) It doesn’t even take an experienced brawler to punch someone to death: An 11-year-old California girl appears to have killed a classmate with her bare hands in a February fistfight.”

  15. Frogg1 says:

    What the Trayvon evidence doesn’t show

    “Records released last week show little evidence that George Zimmerman acted with malice when he shot Trayvon Martin. That could pose a problem for prosecutors…….

    Even if Zimmerman’s conduct sparked the confrontation, he could still be protected under Stand Your Ground if he did not strike the first blow, experts say.

    “Whether he started it or Trayvon started it, we don’t know,” Weiner said. “There’s a real chance the case will be tossed out.”

    Even if the case is not dismissed, at trial Zimmerman can invoke Stand Your Ground along with a traditional self-defense claim.

  16. Redteam says:

    “Even if the case is not dismissed”

    and that is a real possibility just because of politics. On the merits alone, there doesn’t seem to be much reason that it wouldn’t be dismissed outright as a total waste of time and money. But as long as politics and fear are involved, you never know

  17. Layman says:

    AJ Strata: “What would be the point of standing your ground if it was illegal to win the fight?”

    Exactly. This is the same arguement in favor of Zimmerman. I ask once again, “What was Zimmerman supposed to do when he was on the ground, stradled by Martin, who was bashing his head into the sidewalk?”

    AJ Strata: “It makes sense – if you have an open mind to who is at fault.

    It is the ranting of a wish-casting bigot if you have a closed mind to the new evidence just now coming out.”

    So now if we disagree with AJ Strata we’re not only birthers and part of a mob – we’re bigots. INCREDIBLE!

    So may I humbly second the suggestion put forward yesterday at 2:09 PM by ivehadit.

  18. dbostan says:

    It is absolutely amazing to see AJ jumping over the “Zimmerman” shark, again, and doing a triple Lutz and back-flip while in the air.
    This is what I call “protecting the investment” in a losing argument.
    This case is “Duke Lacrosse” redux..
    Even if he is found guilty, which I don’t believe, it will be only due to the political, and race industry, bullying.

  19. dbostan says:


    NEWLY DISCOVERED VIDEO Previously Scrubbed From YouTube Shows Trayvon Martin Participating in Local Fight Club

  20. jan says:


    That video is taken off the air. However, the discovery of this boxing ‘sport,’ that Trayvon participated in, is just another puzzle piece that would explain the punches he was described as delivering to Martin while being on top of him.

    The problem with this whole shooting is that the two main characters, Martin and Zimmerman, were unfairly painted by the press, racist leaders, and sympathetic by-standers who seemed to judge more by the age of the victim than the actual circumstances of the event. Zimmerman was made out to be a vicious, sulking vigilante, while Martin was shown as an innocent kid, eating candy, minding his own business. Zimmerman’s actions are described as ‘stalking,’ while Martin was talking on the phone. People conclude that it was Zimmerman. because of all his assumed character defects, who was the one who jumped Martin, completely ignoring eye witness reports of the guy in red being the one on the ground, being pummeled by a hooded figure.

    I actually cannot remember a case that has been so blown out of proportion as this one, as well as dismembered of truth.