not if TM was the one defending himself.
Difference is, Zimmerman has evidence he was being attacked. There were no other wounds on Martin, other than the gunshot wound, and his knuckles.
If Martin had ANY other injury that suggested he was punched, or hit, or slammed to the ground, you would have a point. But the evidence indicates that Martin had no other defensive injuries besides the gun shot wound.
That leads me to believe that he was the one doing the punching, not Zimmerman. Zimmerman sustained a broken nose, and had lacerations to the back of his head. Defensive wounds. This proves who was doing the punching.
Look, it can easily be proven, with evidence, that Zimmerman's motive was not to start a fight with Martin, and certainly not to kill him. He called the police. It makes perfect sense that Zimmerman left his car to keep Martin in his sight, or to question him. It can easily be proven that Z did not exit his car in pursuit of Martin with the intent of fighting him, or killing him.
So, if it wasn't Z's intent to fight Martin, or to kill him, what was his intent? Easy. It was to identify him, question him, or just keep Martin in his sights until police arrived to question him. But they ended up in a fight. Meaning, that the probability of Martin starting the fight is much higher than the probability that Z started the fight. Then you have the defensive wounds, and Zimmerman's claim that he called out for help.
It all ties together, and only makes sense one way.
If Z's motive was to fight Martin, why didn't he confront him when he was much closer to his car? Instead, he stayed in his car to observe Martin (we know this by what he's doing on the 911 call before Martin ran). If his motive was to kill Martin, why did he call the police to begin with?
On the 911 call, we can tell that Z is perfectly content "watching" or "keeping an eye" on Martin until the police arrive. It's when Martin runs that Z exits his car. If just seconds before, it's obvious Z is content with just "keeping an eye" on Martin, it only makes sense that his motive for leaving his car in pursuit is to keep Martin in his sight for when police arrive, he can locate him.
But of course, one would have to have the ability to "reason" in order to understand this.
No one who is bashing Z will talk about this. What was Z's motive for exiting his car? Was it to fight? no. Was it to kill? no. That can easily be proven WITH EVIDENCE.
Think for once. Listen carefully to the 911 call. Dispatcher tells Z just to sit tight and watch. Z's content response is "sure, ok". Clearly, he is content with just "watching" Martin. Then he says, "ya, he's checking me out good. He's coming towards me. Ya, he's coming over to get a better look at me. There's definately something wrong with this guy."
Then Martin runs, and Z says, "oh, oh, he's running". And you can hear Z exit his car.
Seconds later, the dispatcher says, "are you following him?" Z says, "yes". Dispatcher: "we dont need you to do that". Z: "ok". Seconds later, you know Z lost sight of Martin, because then he says, "oh man, HE RAN". Past tense. Proof. Evidence. Right there. Listen to his comments on the 911 tape. "he ran". Past tense. Indicating he had lost sight of Martin.
The conversation with dispatch continues. It's very clear that Zimmerman is no longer chasing Martin. He's not breathing heavily. He's calm in his responses. The rate of breathing is back to normal. And the conversation is about where the cop will be meeting Zimmerman once he arrives to take a statement from him. Call ends.
5 minutes later, police are on the scene, and Martin has already been shot. Zimmerman is bleeding from the nose and back of the head.
You don't have to be Matlock to piece this together. You just have to get the stupid pre-conceived biases out of your own way.
