Oh, so now you're trying to establish a context for your shitty statements? "Yes, that was stupid, but see I said it on purpose because of Tanoomba"... loser.
Why should we presume that he would have stopped? We shouldn't. We also shouldn't presume that he wouldn't have stopped. We should presume nothing. This is the problem I had with your statements. They were presumptions based on nothing.
Yes, Martin was beating Zimmerman for 30-40 seconds. In that length of time, he got as far as giving Zimmerman 2 cuts on the back of the head and a fractured nose. It wasn't so much a savage beating as a one-sided scuffle. The non-severity of the beating up to that point coupled with the fact that Trayvon had never killed anyone before and had no reason to kill Zimmerman in a populated area mean the far, far more likely outcome would have been that Martin would have gotten a few more licks in then bolted, either because he heard someone approaching or because he felt he "proved his point" to this creepy-ass cracka. That's the direction the evidence points, not "the reason life-threatening injuries didn't occur is because Zimmerman prevented them from occurring". Also notice I said "likely". That makes a difference too.
