• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Martin/Zimmerman, geometry of the attack

Chiefgator

Chiefgator

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
1,172
Reaction score
837
Location
Lake Jem, FL pop:35
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
One thing that does not add up to me is: if Z was getting pounded by Martin, then how the hell did he get his gun out and shoot him in the chest?
The geometry seems jacked up to me.
If Z had his weapon on his hip, he would have got a shot off from his strong hand side, most likely entering Martin's left side.
If Z had his weapon in a cross draw/front carry, and he was really fearing for his life, you would imagine that he would have gotten the first shot off in the lower abdomen area.
If he had his weapon in the small of his back, he is screwed and would never have gotten it out with Martin on top of him.

I have not heard if there were powder burns on Martins clothing that would be consistent with a point blank shot, but they should be there if the events were anything like Z described them.

If he was fearing for his life, why only one shot? If I were on the ground and getting my head voiced off the sidewalk, I am guessing that I would have fired more than once. Maybe not, but it seems likely.
 
Last edited:
its more likely that Martin punched him a few times, got up..and then Zimmerman pulled out his gun, and shot Martin dead.
 
Chiefgator said:
[...] I have not heard if there were powder burns on Martins clothing that would be consistent with a point blank shot, but they should be there if the events were anything like Z described them. [...]
Click to expand...
I'm wondering if they even did any forensics on the clothes. Or if they even still have them. . . . .
 
I do remember hearing it was at close range because I had some of the same thoughts. I don't think they specified what the range was.
 
Chiefgator said:
One thing that does not add up to me is: if Z was getting pounded by Martin, then how the hell did he get his gun out and shoot him in the chest?
The geometry seems jacked up to me.
If Z had his weapon on his hip, he would have got a shot off from his strong hand side, most likely entering Martin's left side.
If Z had his weapon in a cross draw/front carry, and he was really fearing for his life, you would imagine that he would have gotten the first shot off in the lower abdomen area.
If he had his weapon in the small of his back, he is screwed and would never have gotten it out with Martin on top of him.

I have not heard if there were powder burns on Martins clothing that would be consistent with a point blank shot, but they should be there if the events were anything like Z described them.

If he was fearing for his life, why only one shot? If I were on the ground and getting my head voiced off the sidewalk, I am guessing that I would have fired more than once. Maybe not, but it seems likely.
Click to expand...

That Martin didn't shoot him more than once means what again? Since he had not even mentioned having a gun (according to call with girlfriend) Zimmerman's problem was waiting too long to demonstrate having one. One conclusion of only one shot is that Zimmerman didn't want to shoot anyone. Some people, even in life-death situations can not shoot at all.

I train officers and (rarely) civilians. I will literally have them do situationals with real "potential assailants" SOOOO many times over and over, on many days, to try to eliminate the hesitation and decision process. People not familiar with violence and assault can go into totally crippling terror-fear and confusion - for some completely crippling. Their decision process need be resolved and formed before any situation arises.

Your gemetry theories are nonsense as you assume it all happened in exactly 1 instant. It is curious reading how many people on the forum seem totally detached from reality when it comes to fights.
 
Thunder said:
its more likely that Martin punched him a few times, got up..and then Zimmerman pulled out his gun, and shot Martin dead.
Click to expand...

In the back too. As Martin was running away.
 
joko104 said:
That Martin didn't shoot him more than once means what again? Since he had not even mentioned having a gun (according to call with girlfriend) Zimmerman's problem was waiting too long to demonstrate having one. One conclusion of only one shot is that Zimmerman didn't want to shoot anyone. Some people, even in life-death situations can not shoot at all.

I train officers and (rarely) civilians. I will literally have them do situationals with real "potential assailants" SOOOO many times over and over, on many days, to try to eliminate the hesitation and decision process. People not familiar with violence and assault can go into totally crippling terror-fear and confusion - for some completely crippling. Their decision process need be resolved and formed before any situation arises.

Your gemetry theories are nonsense as you assume it all happened in exactly 1 instant. It is curious reading how many people on the forum seem totally detached from reality when it comes to fights.
Click to expand...

These are only questions that I have. They are not theories per se. No where in there did I say that it happened in an instant.
I have been in plenty of fights and have been well trained in the use of firearms. Probably from an instructor much like you. You assume much.

You have answered the reason for only one shot. I will defer to your level of experience. However, in my experience in tactical weapons training (building clearance and take down, military police training), the green guys panic and fire a ton of shots where the more experienced guys fire less often with fewer mistakes and better groups. Zimmerman was very green in this situation.

What about the other questions I had? In your experience as a weapons instructor, would it seem reasonable to assume that a person would pull a weapon from a hip rig and bring it under the assailant and shoot him in the chest? Was Martin sitting straight up at the time? What was the actual trajectory of the bullet? Was it an upward shot?
I don't know the answers to these questions........... that is why I ask them...........
 
Chiefgator said:
These are only questions that I have. They are not theories per se. No where in there did I say that it happened in an instant.
I have been in plenty of fights and have been well trained in the use of firearms. Probably from an instructor much like you. You assume much.

You have answered the reason for only one shot. I will defer to your level of experience. However, in my experience in tactical weapons training (building clearance and take down, military police training), the green guys panic and fire a ton of shots where the more experienced guys fire less often with fewer mistakes and better groups. Zimmerman was very green in this situation.

What about the other questions I had? In your experience as a weapons instructor, would it seem reasonable to assume that a person would pull a weapon from a hip rig and bring it under the assailant and shoot him in the chest? Was Martin sitting straight up at the time? What was the actual trajectory of the bullet? Was it an upward shot?
I don't know the answers to these questions........... that is why I ask them...........
Click to expand...

I posted previously a number of times that in my best guessimate while Zimmerman (or Martin if that's who it was) was yelling for help, they were struggling over the gun. While all the messages that Zimmerman had advantage due to weight (and most here who were/are cops and/or fight experienced would have put our money on Martin), Zimmerman being on the ground, heavier and possibly his hand on the grip would likely win that struggle.

Since I don't know how Martin kept his 9mm, whether or not it was chambered (assume it likely was) all this is guessing. Martin may have been so focused on Zimmerman's head and looking into Zimmerman's eyes he likely would not see Zimmerman managing to free his 9mm. It is possible the reason Martin could pound Zimmerman's head into the concrete (if that happened) as Martin was essentially fighting a "one-armed-man" because with one arm/hand Zimmerman was going for his 9mm.

Or it could happen that Martin let up for a second, giving Zimmerman that second - or Zimmerman fired a couple of seconds after Martin backed off. What I am saying is that anything could have happened.

Absolutely critical forensic evidence, if still possible, is the trajectory and range of the single shot.

As for calculating a single shot, I can invision a person so startled by the sound of the single shot. You can't calculate how a person acts in shock, horror, rage or fear when it is a new experience for that person. I would more expect a trained person to fire more than a single shot. Hollywood has many people believing if you shoot the bad guy one time he will instantly drop dead. For training private citizens (women) who I have carry an concealable 5 shot aluminum stub 38 special with special ammo, I train to fire 3 rounds rapidly. This leaves 2 in reserve.

I'm not saying wrong and apparently wrongly categorized you. I'm saying that we can't know. If they were both skilled fighters we could deduce more. MAYBE Zimmerman had pulled his gun at the start and so panicked he literally dropped it. Or that he had pulled it already and he froze up as Martin slugged in the face, meaning he had the 9mm in his hand from the start and they struggled over it as Martin slugged him in the face with one hand and grabbing the gun with the other. Or .... or .... or...
 
Chiefgator said:
One thing that does not add up to me is: if Z was getting pounded by Martin, then how the hell did he get his gun out and shoot him in the chest?
The geometry seems jacked up to me.
If Z had his weapon on his hip, he would have got a shot off from his strong hand side, most likely entering Martin's left side.
If Z had his weapon in a cross draw/front carry, and he was really fearing for his life, you would imagine that he would have gotten the first shot off in the lower abdomen area.
If he had his weapon in the small of his back, he is screwed and would never have gotten it out with Martin on top of him.

I have not heard if there were powder burns on Martins clothing that would be consistent with a point blank shot, but they should be there if the events were anything like Z described them.

If he was fearing for his life, why only one shot? If I were on the ground and getting my head voiced off the sidewalk, I am guessing that I would have fired more than once. Maybe not, but it seems likely.
Click to expand...

So: we need forensics to test for traces of powder and a retrace possible projectories, etc.

All the more of a reason why epople need to stop trying to be little juries with partial or inadequate 'evidence' and let law come back to do what it shoudl have done in teh first place: actually investigate thoroughly.

Too bad people put this much effort and enthusiasm into Josh Powell's case those boys might still be alive and well.
 
Last edited:
Thanx Joko. I had seen your other posts as I did not read every Martin/Zimmerman thread... There are a lot of them. I hesitated to start a new one, but did. It want to hijack another's thread.

I certainly agree Aunt Spiker. The evidence will have to tell the story. The people that have their mind made up already are doing so with partial information.

I am very interested in this case because I drive through Sanford every day. My wife shops there (closest Sam's). The tensions are high and I want to see it resolved.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
So: we need forensics to test for traces of powder and a retrace possible projectories, etc.

All the more of a reason why epople need to stop trying to be little juries with partial or inadequate 'evidence' and let law come back to do what it shoudl have done in teh first place: actually investigate thoroughly.

Too bad people put this much effort and enthusiasm into Josh Powell's case those boys might still be alive and well.
Click to expand...

How do you know they DIDNT investigate thoroughly?

I want your copy of the entire case file, since you seem to have it.
 
Chiefgator said:
Was Martin sitting straight up at the time? What was the actual trajectory of the bullet? Was it an upward shot?
I don't know the answers to these questions........... that is why I ask them...........
Click to expand...
I don't think that the answers to these questions are publicly available at the moment.
 
Caine said:
How do you know they DIDNT investigate thoroughly?

I want your copy of the entire case file, since you seem to have it.
Click to expand...

LOL - they pretty much said 'we could have investigated this more thoroughly before making a decision'

I think that pretty much sums it up.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
I don't think that the answers to these questions are publicly available at the moment.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. I wish they were tho. Zimmerman is being crucified here locally. He may well deserve it.....then again, he may not. Only the evidence will tell the true tale. Where is Grissom when you need him!
 
I've done force-on-force training with other LE's using blueguns firing simunitions. Included in these scenarios were attempting to draw and fire while being physically attacked or grappled by one or two opponents, and lying on the ground grapping with an opponent.

Strong-side belt is better than cross-draw belt for this type of situation, but still kind of sucks. Appendix carry affords easier access in a prone grapple, but a shoulder holster might actually be primo if you opponent is sitting on top of you.

These situations are dynamic, not static, and you can (WE did) end up with some screwy shooting angles and shot placement depending on how things were going. In one tussle I pulled the trigger with my THUMB to shoot the guy in the BACK while he was on top of me; gun came out backwards.

It's going to be hard to deduce anything concrete from what info we have on this.
 
Last edited:
Goshin said:
I've done force-on-force training with other LE's using blueguns firing simunitions. Included in these scenarios were attempting to draw and fire while being physically attacked or grappled by one or two opponents, and lying on the ground grapping with an opponent.

Strong-side belt is better than cross-draw belt for this type of situation, but still kind of sucks. Appendix carry affords easier access in a prone grapple, but a shoulder holster might actually be primo if you opponent is sitting on top of you.

These situations are dynamic, not static, and you can (WE did) end up with some screwy shooting angles and shot placement depending on how things were going. In one tussle I pulled the trigger with my THUMB to shoot the guy in the BACK while he was on top of me; gun came out backwards.

It's going to be hard to deduce anything concrete from what info we have on this.
Click to expand...
Well said. And another reason I want to see the trajectory. If it is a smooth clean straight on shot to center mass, it would hurt Zimmerman's case that he was being pummeled at the time of the shot.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
LOL - they pretty much said 'we could have investigated this more thoroughly before making a decision'

I think that pretty much sums it up.
Click to expand...

They made a decision on the first night.
They could have taken their time before going to the prosecutor to try to charge him.
 
Caine said:
They made a decision on the first night.
They could have taken their time before going to the prosecutor to try to charge him.
Click to expand...

That is just wrong thinking. The decision begins with "don't charge a suspect" until investigation gives reason to - unless that is apparent at the time of detention/arrest.
 
Goshin said:
I've done force-on-force training with other LE's using blueguns firing simunitions. Included in these scenarios were attempting to draw and fire while being physically attacked or grappled by one or two opponents, and lying on the ground grapping with an opponent.

Strong-side belt is better than cross-draw belt for this type of situation, but still kind of sucks. Appendix carry affords easier access in a prone grapple, but a shoulder holster might actually be primo if you opponent is sitting on top of you.

These situations are dynamic, not static, and you can (WE did) end up with some screwy shooting angles and shot placement depending on how things were going. In one tussle I pulled the trigger with my THUMB to shoot the guy in the BACK while he was on top of me; gun came out backwards.

It's going to be hard to deduce anything concrete from what info we have on this.
Click to expand...

I do so often too with officers. Newbies to this are usually surprised how easily I can usually take their sidearm - and without actually really striking them in a damaging way. Sadly, some officers are murdered with their own sidearm. If in close, I stress they must be in control of the situation before trying to draw. If not, it is almost flipping a coin who will have it and if the assailant-suspect is a skilled fighter he'll likely win it. Fortunately few are and often drunk or under some drug influence too.

You probably remember the Texas video of two young men stopped by a deputy constable where they struggled and obtained his sidearm, outright killing him with it - all on his cruiser's video.

Once there is a struggle over a pistol or a struggle goes to the ground - one or both of them - there's no figuring on deductions how that one will turn out.
 
I was taught by an old SEAL Master Chief, "Charge a gun, back away from knife"

I have luckily never been in that situation. The training scenarios were always eye opening. With minimal training I was able to disarm a person with startling regularity. Not enough that I would Choose to be in that situation, mind you. No Internet hero here, thank you....
 
Chiefgator said:
I was taught by an old SEAL Master Chief, "Charge a gun, back away from knife" [....]
Click to expand...
I too was instructed to stay well clear of a knife... much clearer than I would have thought. The obvious lesson was that it is quite possible to bring a knife to a gunfight and win.
 
TMAttack-1.jpg
 
sharon said:
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMAttack-1.jpg[/im[/QUOTE]

Oh look. Sharon is posting irrelevant pics again.
Go figure!
Click to expand...
 
Excon said:
Oh look. Sharon is posting irrelevant pics again.
Go figure!
Click to expand...

She believes it shows that Z couldn't have gotten his gun. She forgets that T was allegedly reaching for the gun, so would have had to make room, which would inadvertently make room for Zimmerman as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom