Last night, the police released this video showing George Zimmerman shortly after he killed an unarmed Florida teen. I discussed the legal significance of the video on Countdown last night.
As I mentioned last night, the video would pose both strategic and tactical problems for a defense. First, the absence of obvious injuries would obviously undermine the claim of a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death in the use of lethal force. However, it would not be determinative on the question. Zimmerman was treated by paramedics at the scene who could testify that he was indeed bleeding. Moreover, the defense is based on a reasonable fear of such harm. If Zimmerman could convince at least one juror that Martin was the aggressor, he may be able to avoid conviction on this nebulous standard. This might be strengthened by a claim that Martin tried to grab his gun. However, the video shows a Zimmerman who appears unharmed and casual. At a minimum, it seems to contradict accounts that he was a bloody mess at the scene. That would put particular importance on the testimony of the paramedics and officers at the scene.
On a tactical level, my first thought as a criminal defense attorney was that the video could be viewed as admissible in a trial. It seems obviously relevant to the claim of self-defense. Yet, defense counsel (and judges) work hard to avoid jurors seeing a defendant in prison garb or handcuffs. The prejudice from such an image can be immense. This video of Zimmerman in handcuffs after the killing could present such a prejudicial impact, but still be viewed as admissible since the value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial impact. The video leaves the impression of an immaculate assailment — where an individual fights for his life but shows no obvious injury.
While the 911 call has portions that help and hurt Zimmerman, this video is entirely detrimental to the defense in my opinion. I would not want a jury to see the video as a defense attorney but I would expect a judge to admit it as material to the question of self-defense. That does not mean that I would not try to keep it out. One claim would be that, since paramedics had cleaned him up at the scene, the video is misleading as well as prejudicial. Defense counsel could also point out that there is a reported four-hour delay the fight and this video. Finally, some have noted that one officer appears to check out part of Zimmerman’s head at one point on the tape. between A judge, however, could deny the motion on the ground that the defense can make that point through cross-examination and argument.
In the end, the prosecutor will have to decide on the viability of even a manslaughter claim based on the conflicting accounts of witnesses – and the generous self-defense standard in Florida. Courts have generally given shooters the benefit of doubts on the reasonable fear of grave bodily injury and self-defense. It is possible to use the privilege of self-defense before one is injured. It has also been used successfully in cases of an unarmed alleged assailant.
I still believe that there is sufficient evidence here to sustain a charge. However, as I have previously said, I have great reservations about the effort to pressure the prosecutor through petitions and political pressure — as well as recent irresponsible acts that border on vigilantism. I do not believe in prosecution by plebiscite and thus declined to sign the petition demanding prosecution. This video offers another piece of evidence that I believe supports prosecution. Yet, there remains difficult legal questions about the viability of a charge under the Florida standard and prior case law. The country and justice would be better served by an objective review of such evidence.
We still need to see the forensic evidence that I previously described as well as the statements of some of the witnesses like the paramedics. Many questions remain unanswered like the trajectory of the bullet, any fingerprints on the weapon, the extent of the respective injuries on the men, and the proximity and relative position of the gun when it was fired.
Messpo
Messpo 2, Others 0
Particularly liked your pointing out the publics long awaited need for justice against a suspected corrupt system.
Unfortunatlely this corruption will not disappear with the solution of this one.
What to do?!
At the 50 second mark you can see the officer checking out the back of Zimmerman’s head.
At the 1:06 mark you can see what appears as a dark area on the back of Zimmerman’s head; just below the crown.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/29/police-surveillance-video-of-zimmerman-may-show-head-injury/
Why didn’t Professor Turley take note of these things?
It is reported that this video was taken nearly 4 hours after the incident took place. After Zimmerman was allegedly treated on the scene by rescue personnel.
Just a short comment about the officer shown in the video apparently examining the prisoner for injuries and then at least twice wiping his hand on his clothes.
I don’t know exactly what it that he was wiping away, but I simply cannot imagine that it was blood.
In these days of HIV and Hepatitis risks, anybody and everybody who has any professional contact in such roles has been drilled, drilled, and drilled again about precautions. If it were blood, the officers would have put on the latex gloves they often carry on their person–and most certainly in their cars–before even touching the guy.
But wiping prisoner blood on their own clothing? Seriously?
Virtually impossible.
Help me understand…
Let’s assume there was a physical altercation (which may not have happened) – Since Trayvon was the one being followed/stalked by Zimmerman, wouldn’t Trayvon be justified in defending himself under the stand your ground law? Per conversations with his girlfriend, Trayvon was afraid of the guy following him. If the stalker then kills the guy who tries to stand his ground, how can the stalker then claim he was standing his ground?
This seems to be a circular arguement based off a bad law.
Mr. Zimmerman was driving his personal vehicle…was it clearly marked as a ‘Neighborhood wtch’ vehicle? (they are where I live,,,,they are clerly marked ‘patrol cars’ He was armed….I haven’t found any watch programs that allow being armed…most have instructions to call….only call…when suspicious activity is discovered or perceived…..Trayvon Martin could only see some angry looking guy coming after him….no uniform….redneck vehicle of choice….etc.
http://www.mysuncoast.com/news/local/story/Sarasota-neighborhood-watch-volunteers-must/bZQM5cZSJEenAdMs-he_Mw.cspx
@Talking: To my knowledge Zimmerman was not deputized and had no official capacity whatsoever. You can be a Neighborhood Watch Captain simply by calling yourself that. It means nothing, it is like being a psychic advisor or magician or something. Just claim the title and it is yours.
I agree on the approach question. Based on the girlfriend’s testimony, she is an earwitness to the scuffle: Trayvon told her somebody was following him, then asked Zimmerman why he was following him, and Zimmerman responded “What are you doing here?”
Based on the 911 call, and this confrontational question, and Trayvon’s apparent fear at being followed, I would conclude (were I on the jury) that Zimmerman chose to follow and confront Trayvon and thus instigated the fight.
Then the “stand your ground” law applies to Trayvon; not Zimmerman. Even if Trayvon swung first (and there is no evidence of that, I am just saying that in that extreme case), swinging first was justified because he was scared for his life. As a juror, even as I believe in the right to fight instead of backing down, I would hang the jury before I would agree that somebody has the right to pick a fight, kill somebody, and then claim they were acting in self defense. Zimmerman should be tried and fried.
That numeral 9 before the cite for the civil rights statute should be a ( not a 9. in my just posted comment.
Art a Lawman:
“Haste in serious matters seldom serves the public well.”
*********************
Justice delayed is justice denied.
~William Gladstone
I could not get the videos to open on this computer. Who is at fault here for the kids death is one issue and who is at fault for the state’s failure to prosecute is separate but equal. Fault for the killing lies with the authorities or entities who deputized Zimmerman as Watch Commander or whatever nominclature is put on it. The media has been employing this term from day one instead of Vigilante. So, what is the basis for him being some entities Neighborhood Watch Commander? If the cops, the town, the state, the property owners association deputized him or annoited him, then they are his superior officers or supervisors and are liable with him under the civil rights statute allowing suit for damages 942 U.S.C. Section 1983). This is not the same as the rubric for criminal liability for these schmucks.
The media should substantiate that he has been lawfully deputized by the cops, city, state as a Neighborhood Watch Commander or call him a Vigilante.
To me the whole thing hinges on who approached who. If 911 told Zimmerman to NOT follow and he did anyway then HE instigated the incident.
If on the other hand if he DID stop following the kid, and was heading back to his truck, and the teen attacked him….well that’s a whole different story.~Dredd
———————————————–
yup, and how far away from the truck was the scuffle? direction of the victims head? footprints in the scuffley grass? (wet grass will be more likely to lay flat when stepped on…)…so many things yet t come to light…
…and I’m sure it will given that everything was done absolutely by the book and above board….
Unfortunately, the self defense as an affirmative defense at trial is not how the FL statute is written. Here is the actual statute:
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection
The important section , in this instance, is subsection 2. This is what the SPD is said to rely on. However, now word comes out that the original detective did press for charges and it was the state attorney that denied. Either way, the FL laws pulls this defense out of the courts and leaves it in the hands of the police department. This is a truly troubling rule. It completely subverts the US idea of trial by your peers.
JT:
“As I mentioned last night, the video would pose both strategic and tactical problems for a defense.”
*******************
It does, however, present strategic and tactical advantages for getting to the truth.
Quite frankly, I’m a little surprised by your clinical take on this killing. While the perspectives of defense counsel may be interesting to some, I think it’s everybody’s business to get to the truth here as much for the nation’s sake as the Martin family’s sake. With the obviously erroneous police report, the city manager’s, shall we say, creative statement on what happened, and the police chief’s outright lie to the family combined with the delay caused in identifying the body despite the department’s knowledge of the name and address of the deceased, we have a powder keg with fuse lit. The only thing that will put it out is perceived justice.
Perhaps most importantly we have a community with decades of mistreatment at the hands of Sandford officials feeling their concerns are not our concerns. They have a dead child who cannot speak for himself and whose only crime seems to be going to the convenience store unarmed and walking while black. We also have the perception of favoritism since the defendant (and he’ll be one soon) is the son of a retired Virginia magistrate and clerk of courts who appears to have beaten the system on two violent charges.
This tape is not merely relevant to the facts, but it is a devastating rebuttal to Zimmerman’s central claim that he was assaulted from behind and his head pounded into the concrete even while his nose was broken by this 140 pound 17-year-old. Anyone with eyes can tell that simply didn’t happen as many of us with experience in these matters surmised earlier before the tape broke. Couple that with Zimmerman’s refusal to go to the hospital, the refusal of his counsel to provide any evidence at all that his nose was broken as he abruptly terminated an interview, and you have a picture of a liar being granted immunity for some form of homicide by the prosecutor with his counsel being complicit in the snow job. This is simply something a law enforcement system in a democracy cannot handle and the reason for “pressure” on the prosecutors to file the charges.
I think this case demands more that a dispassionate discussion of tactics and strategies for extricating this apparent zealot from the national mess he’s caused, either through his own criminality or just imprudence. It demands a single-minded and post-haste search for what the system was designed to do: find truth; render justice.
Angelica,
Zimmerman’s father was a magistrate–not a judge–in Virginia.
You forget that this all would have been swept under the rug if it weren’t for people coming forward. The good ol boys are protecting their own. (Mr Z’s daddy is a judge you forgot)
John 1, March 29, 2012 at 8:27 am
To me the whole thing hinges on who approached who. If 911 told Zimmerman to NOT follow and he did anyway then HE instigated the incident.
If on the other hand if he DID stop following the kid, and was heading back to his truck, and the teen attacked him….well that’s a whole different story.
But without witnesses, we are only going to get one side of the story. (Unless some piece of evidence can prove Zimmerman was lying.)
=====================================================
The burden of proof is on the person raising the affirmative defense of self defense (Zimmerman). No one has to disprove their defense, they are the ones that must prove self defense. Doubts go against them, not the victim.
The killer is to be arrested in any case, then bring the self defense case later, in motions and/or at trial.
The Cops appointed themselves as the Court and Jury in this case, usurping the law they are sworn to uphold.
I do agree. I too did not sign the petition. As flawed as our justice system can be it is the best we have and should run it’s course. Haste in serious matters seldom serves the public well.
Well, theres only one thing let to do – smear the victim. OH wait, they have already started doing that, apparently with the help of the SPD.
To me the whole thing hinges on who approached who. If 911 told Zimmerman to NOT follow and he did anyway then HE instigated the incident.
If on the other hand if he DID stop following the kid, and was heading back to his truck, and the teen attacked him….well that’s a whole different story.
But without witnesses, we are only going to get one side of the story. (Unless some piece of evidence can prove Zimmerman was lying.)
I have pointed out all along that Florida criminal common law, applied to the affirmative defense of “self defense” was clear: it is an issue pleaded and brought up at trial, wherein the defendant has the burden of proof and persuasion.
The stand your ground law of Florida modified the Florida criminal common law to allow the defense to be brought up in pre-trial motions, again with the defendant carrying the burden of proof and persuasion. If the judge denies the self-defense motion, the defendant can still bring it up again before the jury.
That is why the detective requested an arrest warrant for homicide / negligent manslaughter against Zimmerman.
The prosecutor and Chief of Police usurped the authority of the Court, rendering a verdict for Zimmerman.
This is a civil rights crime of the typical sort where police / prosecutors use the ruse of a state law to criminally impinge on a citizen’s civil rights.
They should be prosecuted along with Zimmerman, for violation of federal civil rights.