Fight expert says that Zimmerman's scenario is bunk

The killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman is a story that ran through most of the media earlier this year, with strong opinions expressed on both sides of the issue. Martin was shot by Zimmerman as he walked to his father’s apartment in a gated community. Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighborhood watcher who was armed, followed Martin assuming he was a potential burglar. The two had a confrontation, where Zimmerman pulled out his holstered handgun and shot Martin.

Contrary to reports in the media, it is possible to reenact the murder and to discredit the stories coming out of the Zimmerman camp. My own background is in martial arts and I do reenactments of street crimes for the purposes of self-defense training.

Zimmerman’s first story (as related by his brother to the media) is full of easily discredited holes. He claims that Trayvon Martin was seated on top of him, smashing his head against the pavement, whereas he went for his holstered gun and shot him in the chest. This story is as unlikely as “space aliens made him do it.”


Let’s start with the position that Martin and Zimmerman were allegedly in. It’s called “the mount” as shown in the following picture:



This is a common judo, jujitsu or MMA position. According to Zimmerman’s brother, Martin was seated in a “high mount,” with his knees positioned over Zimmerman’s arms. Grabbing a person’s head and banging it against the pavement from a high mount is not an expected technique even in a street fight, and for obvious reasons. Picking up a person’s head from this position is like trying to pull a door open with your right hand while holding it shut with your left. Smashing the head down uses the neck as a pivot point giving the top attacker only a few inches to work with. When the bottom fighter tightens up, it’s almost impossible to move the head up and down. My colleagues and I agree that from the mount position, the top fighter might get one small blow to the head before the bottom fighter stiffens his neck and stops the attack. This can’t be done with a push. It must be done with a striking motion that requires some skill to execute. Most likely, the idea for this scenario came straight out of a movie and has little to do with a real fight.

What fighters normally do from the mount is to punch or elbow down on the victim as shown in this picture:

This is called “ground and pound,” a common MMA attack. Trying to grab a person by the head and leaning back in order to “smash” his head into the pavement would require the attacker to rock back and forth. This could result in the person at the bottom “bucking” the attacker off or at least providing a way to fight back. This is even more important given that Martin was about 30 pounds lighter than Zimmerman (depending on whose report you give credence to). A lighter person is automatically going to be at a big disadvantage in staging this kind of attack and is much easier to be shaken off by the heavier opponent.

Here is a self-defense video for escaping the mount. You can check other videos on youtube.com. The lighter the opponent, the easier it is to roll over on him and escape the position.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNKKVHgIu2I

Now we get to Zimmerman’s main problem. If he’s on the bottom, how does he get to his gun?

Notice that in the following picture the fighter at the bottom would have difficulty getting his hands free to get the gun. Note also that the left leg of the attacker is likely covering the area where the gun would have been holstered. In my reenactment, the bottom fighter was never able to get to his gun, whether from a strangle hold or a ground and pound.

Assume that “victim” Zimmerman gets to his gun. How does he shoot Martin in the chest? For that matter, how does he keep Martin from wrestling him for the gun? And how does he get away with taking just one shot to hit Martin dead center? The mount position would almost certainly result in multiple shots being fired including a number produced by accident. A one shot center chest hit is highly improbable.

Who was Actually on Top?

An early witness to the fight said that she saw a situation where one person was on top, but could not tell who that person was. She made every effort not to “fill in” her observations with opinions or corrections, making her a credible witness. In fact, she actually identified Zimmerman as being on top without knowing it. Why? Because the hooded sweatshirt that Martin was wearing is the kind where the hood tends to “ride up” over the head. (I know this from experience because I own one of those types of hoodies.) In a fight situation, the hood would have tended to cover the head, and unless it were pitch black out, the witness would have clearly seen the hood. Since no hood was seen, Zimmerman was, by logical deduction, on top and not Martin. Other witnesses came forward well after this one, but this witness seemed to be a lot more credible than those.

What was The Fight Experience of Either Martin or Zimmerman?

It’s critical to know what either party knew about martial arts or what kind of training either party had prior to the fight. Untrained fighters face major difficulties in a street fight (which is why we have martial arts schools and martial arts training). For one thing, hitting someone in the head with an unconditioned fist is as likely to injure the puncher’s hand as it is the attacked person’s head. If Martin were the attacker and throwing punches and had no martial arts training, his hands would have clearly shown injuries such as major bruising or even broken bones. This would be even more likely if he had struck Zimmerman in back of the head (as some accounts had claimed). This is why hand conditioning is part of karate training. (Punching someone in back of the head is like trying to break a coconut with one’s fist.)

The second issue is the ability to fight from the mount. MMA fighters train extensively to deal with this position so that they aren’t thrown out of the position or get it reversed on them. A later witness supposedly saw Martin in a mount position doing a ground and pound on Zimmerman “MMA style.” This would require training, and to date no evidence of MMA training has been revealed in either party.

Injuries to Zimmerman

Photos of injuries to George Zimmerman’s head have recently surfaced on CBS News, taken right after the fight. I can state with confidence that these injuries were not the result of blows to the head from a ground and pound.

When the head is struck with a fist or striking the pavement a lump and dark bruising will form at the point of contact. This kind of bruising is what causes a “black eye” as shown in the following photo (picture of basketball coach Greg Devers days after being struck by a fan, from the internet):


Note the color of the bruising and the swelling around it. There are none of these in Zimmerman’s picture. If Zimmerman were struck in the face while lying on the pavement, the injuries would appear on the face and directly behind the blow on the back of the head in one concentrated area where the head was slammed against the pavement or hard ground. Instead we see scraping types of injuries all over the back of the head. These appear to be the kind of injuries that would have resulted from rolling round on pavement or hitting curbs or other obstructions and not from concentrated blows to the head.

There should also be bruising and swelling under Zimmerman’s left eye (assuming that Martin was right handed) where Martin would have concentrated his attack. Nothing of the kind is seen in the photo.

Who Screamed for Help?

One of the keys to understanding a street fight is that “multitasking” is not an option for most people. When a karate master takes on, say, three attackers simultaneously, his or her approach is to deal with this as one single attack and not three separate attacks. Screaming for help is a separate event from fighting. One does not fight and scream for help simultaneously. It’s the party that has stopped fighting (or never engaged in a fight) that does the screaming.

I would put my money on Trayvon Martin as the screamer when he was pinned to the ground. Why not Zimmerman? Because he had an ace in the hole in this fight, his gun, and he would have been fighting to get to it, and not taking the time to do anything else. It would have been a single minded effort. Even assuming that Zimmerman was being “ground and pounded,” he would know that he had the ultimate weapon in this fight, and that’s what he would have been going for, and not screaming for help.

Did Martin Know Zimmerman was Armed?

The last crazy theory presented by the Zimmerman camp is that Martin knew that Zimmerman was armed and “went for his gun.” Just when did Martin come to this “epiphany”? Before he allegedly attacked Zimmerman – that an unarmed person would start a fight with someone he knew was armed? If he were on top in the mount position, there’s no way he could have seen the gun until Zimmerman had clearly drawn it out of its holster. If Zimmerman were in the top position and drawn the gun, it would have been way too late to “fight for the gun.”

So What Actually Happened?

The only scenario that I can figure out that makes any sense is this. Zimmerman took off after Martin after making a phone call to the police about a “suspicious” character in the neighborhood, even though he was told by the police not to do so. When he caught up with Martin a confrontation (starting with pushing and shoving) ensued, at which point Zimmerman grabbed Martin, who may or may not have punched at Zimmerman. Generally when this happens in most street fights, the parties fall to the ground and roll around, whereby Zimmerman scraped his head on pavement. After rolling to the top position, Zimmerman got to his gun and took one shot at Martin, killing him instantly, just after Martin began screaming for help.

http://thefreedombulletin.com/2012/06/a-martial-artist-looks-at-the-zimmermanmartin-murder-case/

This raises several questions?

Why didn't the State have its own MMA expert testify to discredit George's obviously contrived story?

There were two potential male jurors who had listed fighting as a past time. Why didn't the State attempt to get either one of them on the jury.

Also statistics show that women are more likely to acquit than men. So why in the heck did the State allow an all female jury?

 

Yeah, everyone who wasn't there is an expert.

 

There are certain principles that don't change regardless of situation. Just like physics.

But of course you don't want to believe anything but your heroes various versions of the truth

 

I have seen this information with photos and diagrams before.

It gets very problematic when you consider that George wore his holster on his right side.. gun butt facing forward for a left hand cross draw.

My daughter and I tried it with an eggbeater for a gun.. and it was impossible.

 

Add to that fact that during the walk-through and police interview George stated that he had Trayvon's left hand/arm trapped under his right armpit, but he was able to raise his right arm to fire the gun.

That doesn't make any sense. When he raised his arm to fire that would have freed Trayvon's left hand/arm. Also what was Trayvon doing with his right arm/hand all that time?

Was he suddenly paralyzed?

 

I don't have a clue.. Seems to me that George wrist would have to be very different than other human wrists to pull off that maneuver.. unless Trayvon was getting up to end the fight.

I have many brothers and gobs of boy cousins. Sometimes they scrapped.

The course of a fight went something like this... a punch was thrown... there was some rolling around on the ground.. and then someone got up ... signaling the end of the altercation.

 

I remember someone did a biomechanical analysis of just that subject but I can't find that post anywhere and I forgot the name of the blog. I really wish that I had bookmarked it.

These are only few things that prove that the State threw the case and reinforces Dr. Bao's allegation that the State thought that Trayvon got what he deserved.

 

I worked in Florida for a few years.. They don't impress me at all.

 

Because the whole thing was a put up job by the local police dept., a borderline psychotically racist former judge and his certifiably psychotic grandnephew. There had been eight break ins in the area recently, and the local cops were desperate that somebody might actually ask them to do their jobs, like get out and send around patrol cars in less than an hour while actually INVESTIGATING some crimes that had actually happened. The former judge probably suggested that in the old days they'd just have a lynching and the blacks, seen as the source of all crime, would be afraid to leave their homes. So the whites would then all be happy again, even though the crime rate stayed the same, because they didn't see any blacks.

Lynching's been straight out for some time, however, (though you wouldn't think so to listen to many posters here) and they couldn't just have the cops shoot a few random blacks. That would involve just reams of paperwork and might even uncover some of the other stinking corpses they have lying about....What to do?

They decided, therefore, to give Georgie one free N*&&$r and everything would be great. It was just their bad luck that instead of some poor older black with the same police records all such naturally pick up in this beautiful and friendly land that killed more Americans than all our other wars combined in a futile effort to keep several millions enslaved, that Georgie was so anxious to murder somebody (and so craven as well) that he took the first teenager he saw.

After that what we've been treated to is the spectacle of everyone doing their best to cover up what really happened and sweep the whole thing under a rug. The problem is that a pile of (*)(*)(*)(*) from the hind end of a brachiosaurus is really difficult to disguise with just a few extra magnolias

 

Yes. . .and more I think about it, and more upset I am about the prosecution NOT bringing all those details up during trial. The defense made a "show" of laying down on the floor.. . etc. . .

Why didn't the prosecution?

I believe, now, that the prosecution never intended to really fight for justice, but was a travesty to appease people who wanted justice.

There are just too much evidence that doesn't make sense. . .and was never brought up during trial.
And I am not even including the statement, after the trial, of the coroner!

Today, I believe that the prosecution just through in the case!

 

It does seem that the prosecution was playing with the case. God help them if George goes forward to kill someone else or get killed.

 

This seems like it is built upon a lot of conjectures and assumptions. Every fight is different. I think it is a possible scenario, but certainly not what I would consider "beyond reasonable doubt".

 

Did you even read the OP?

It's not conjecture. The writer is basing what he wrote on George's scenario of events that night.

He just debunked George's lies one by one especially when it's obvious that George could have bridged his body and easily thrown Trayvon off him that night if Trayvon were indeed on his chest.

Furthermore George stated that he was able to move his head off the sidewalk so that Trayvon wouldn't be able to slam it onto the concrete sidewalk any more.

That would mean that George was able to not only move his 200lb body but also Trayvon's 160lbs for a total of 360lbs but wasn't able to bridge out of the hold and throw Trayvon off him?

GTFOOH!!

 

I'm waiting for the "George won, get over it" comments.

Anyway, I'd still like to know how Martin could be sitting on Zimmerman while going for his rear-holstered gun. How is this possible?

- - - Updated - - -

Like the person who testified about the MMA-style fighting? Was he an expert? Is he more entitled to an opinion about MMA fighting than the OP?

 

Wasn't Zimmerman's gun rear-holstered?

I also wonder how Martin's body was found so far south of the 'T', where Zimmerman said the fight started.

 

A year plus old article full of opinions carries about as much weight as the chance just one more Limpapa video was going to take Zimmerman down.

But you Zim haters have fun rehashing things lol.

 

We are just discussing the fact that the physical altercation most certainly did not go the way he claimed.

 

No, you are not.

You are discussing an "experts" dubious opinion that anyone even remotely familar with this case, or even basic logic, could easily poke holes into.

And Margot2 is of course adding her vast knowledge of how George had his gun holstered in the cross draw position.

To bad that in the video done of Georges reenactment he does NOT cross draw thus yet again showing that the Zim haters still feel the need to make up fantasy scenarios.

Yawn.

 

Eggbeater lol.

 

You add nothing, but your lame criticisms and attempt to deflect from the facts that George lied that night.

If you can poke holes in the experts analysis knock yourself out. Otherwise stay off the thread.

What tickles me is that even though George was acquitted as you like to remind us you George fanboys swoop down on any thread that states an opinion which contradicts anything your hero may have claimed about the events of that night.

 

Ok I just had my neighbor take her nut cracker and had her pretend it was a gun while I straddled her and punched her until she started bleeding and getting dizzy and she was able to get the cracker out of the holster we made with an apron so it can be done.

 

I have been training in martial arts since 1975 and I'll say that you have a very rich fantasy life. Just about anything is possible at night, in the rain, when adrenaline is pumping, and neither fighter has enough training to get in the way of instinct. For every one expert who agrees with your cute scenario there's another one out there, equally trained and credentialed, who'll blow you a raspberry . . . pssssst! Still and all . . . it was cute.

 

Perhaps Zimmerman didn't know what to do, not being a trained fighter. To the untrained, "just bridge out of it" is like "just throw a flying roundhouse kick". Easier said than done, even if he knew that it was the thing to do (which he may not have).

 

This is all the same old argument, have you been in fights? I have. Have you been on the ground,,both over and under? You are moving, moving constantly and each move, each and every sudden move changes things. For anybody to think this is an exact science and ''A'' is here,,so ''B'' MUST be there is completely and entirely incorrect.
I do not care what any ''dime a dozen expert'' says. Anything and everything is possible when two men are in a heated physical exchange rolling and straddling on the ground.
I do not question your sincerity, I really do think you feel this is correct. Speak to those who have been in such altercations and listen to what they say..''Man it was a Blur'' Sure they can recall sudden moments, certain things, but all in all you could not possibly keep track of every second. Too many twists and turns. One second your hand is blocked, the next it's free, then blocked, then free.

This is why it's called street fighting, and not choreography.....

 

Precisely correct. I have fought for my life hand to hand at night and with no back up. Either I did everything right and walked away after the confrontation or I didn't walk away at all. It's NEVER like a training hall scenario. It's always faster than it seems that it should be, the movements are difficult to see, your strikes are not hitting as solid or as on target as they should be doing, the footing is uneven or even slanted and there's broken glass to fall on . . . it ain't pretty, and it ain't smooth, and it ain't neat.