The evidence continues to roll in on the Zimmerman case. While the new evidence is not entirely bad for the prosecution, it does contain some evidence that will likely bolster the defense of George Zimmerman in the second degree murder trial over the killing of Trayvon Martin. Regardless of the ultimate impact, the evidence again shows (in my opinion) that prosecutor Angela Corey over-charged the case in Florida.
Some of the new evidence shows that Martin had traces of THC (the active ingredient of marijuana) in his blood stream and urine. Martin was suspended from school due to a marijuana offense (though it involved an empty marijuana baggie). Another benefit to the defense is that Martin father is shown denying that the voice calling out for help was his son — though he later changed that view when he says he was given a better recording. Other witnesses have indicated that it Zimmerman who was calling for help.
Generally, the existence of drugs in the system of a victim or defendant is admissible. The suspension would appear inadmissible under standard evidentiary rules.
There is also evidence that some neighbors described Zimmerman as a bully and a racist. That would help bolster the reported hate crimes prosecution being considered by the Obama Administration, though I still have reservations based on the evidence as it currently stands. Also the police viewed the shooting as “avoidable” — if Zimmerman had left the matter to the police.
I am not sure how much of the neighbor’s view of Zimmerman as a bully or racist could come into evidence. Such accounts, however, can have the benefit of further discouraging Zimmerman from taking the stand as a witness — always a benefit to the prosecution because (while they are told that a defendant has a right not to testify (jurors expect to hear from defendants).
On the whole, however, I would view the evidence as more positive to the defense. First, I have previously said that I was most interested in the distance of the shot and forensics. It now appears that Martin was shot from an intermediate range (no more than 18 inches and as little as an inch away). That would support the claim of Zimmerman that they were in a wrestling fight when the gun was fired. The greater the distance the stronger the case for the prosecution. The defense will likely present expert testimony to try to reduce the range further on the stand. Also, the report does have people at the scene saying that Zimmerman’s nose appeared broken — supporting the later medical report of the family doctor (though such injuries could occur from Martin defending himself).
Moreover, at least two witnesses appear to support Zimmerman in describing the man in the hoodie at straddling the other man and throwing punches. The report state that the man in the “‘hoodie’ [was] on top of a white or Hispanic male and throwing punches ‘MMA (mixed martial arts) style.’ He then heard a pop. He stated that after hearing the pop, he observed the person he had previously observed on top of the other person (the male wearing the hoodie) laid out on the grass.” One report also says that Zimmerman can be heard yelling for help 14 times on a 911 call recorded during the fight.
While the reports blame Zimmerman for getting out of his vehicle (he says that he was trying to get a house number for the police), that is not itself a crime. Of course, none of this means that Zimmerman was not the aggressor. Given the presumption of innocence and the need to prove the elements beyond a reasonable doubt, this evidence presents an added problem for the prosecution in my view. I have expressed skepticism over the way the case has developed and how it has been charged from the outset. As a criminal defense attorney, I would view this as a strong defense case even on the manslaughter charge, particularly given the poor police work at the scene.
What do you think?
Here is the police report.
Source: ABC and NY Daily News
Shano, I really have to shut up now. But strictly, I may have been a bit fast. This guy surely does not dispatch immediately. But he may not have arrived in time nevertheless. or the minute it took for him to dispatch may not have changed anything essential. We do not know were S2711 was at the same time. All we know is, at the time he was dispatched, he he must have been closer. He is dispatched at the time Z reports “the suspect” runs.
But that’s how things like this happen, bad coincidences adding up.
thanks bettykath, it’s always assuring to know one wasn’t alone 😉 My first suspension from high-school (Gymnasium) resulted from the fact that I didn’t want to wear skirts in summer, and this was a strict rlaw. But I felt they had no right to order it to me. I think I was fourteen close to fifteen at the time. The rule hadn’t existed in the town we lived before. I was really mad, but I ultimately had to surrender.
There’s another flavour of ‘Goals of the Public’ Malisha – in the literal sense of ‘public;.
The must be a significant number of people who would rather not be made aware of problems related to law enforcement.
It’s all very well to laugh at comedy movies like Neighbourhood Watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgLXIt4gJQo
It’s a different matter to consider the the real life local NW guys might be ‘funny’.
From reports about this case, it appears that some residents are already aware that Zimmerman is an oddball. There are no doubt others in that place who would resist the notion.
Ditto for their image of cops.
If it were to become generally accepted that the cops not only messed up but might have also covered up, then anything done by cops is open to question.
While this is as it should be, it is not only the cops that would be uncomfortable with that atmosphere.
Videos coming out of the Occupy movement often show a level of brutality and illegality by cops.
Some states have laws forbidding the videotaping of cops. Cops don’t like their actions to be open to review like that. Neither do their city/state bosses like their management to be open to question.
NRA and fellow-travellers have a problem
If Zimmerman goes down it should be raising all sorts of questions about how someone like that can be wandering around with a licensed concealed weapon.
Those sorts of questions are highly unwelcome for some people.
People yearn for certainties.
This sort of thing shakes up comforting assumptions.
Leander, that’s ordinary autopsy stuff. Nothing unusual, and all required. It’s the “intermediate range” that is significant.
I wonder what people feel about the autopsy report. Can someone with medical expertise explain to me what a remarkable versus an “unremarkable” penis is? …
But this is not my main question. Is the thorough examination of all the organs, including e.g. weighing brain and kidneys necessary due to Zimmerman’s suspicion, Trayvon was on drugs? Or do we normally see a concentration on what caused the death?
leander, that really is a tragic timeline. If that policeman had left just one minute earlier the shooting may have been prevented. Horrific.
Leander,
“I was really frustrated in my early schooldays that all females had to do needlework, while boys could take handicraft or more technically oriented lessons. That’s why I wonder at his choice, and it feels it was his choice. No?”
I was frustrated with that too. I successfully lobbied for girls to be included in the open gym at lunch and the mechanical drawing class. But things have changed. Gender no longer restricts. As far as I can see, all classes except PE are co-ed.
We do know from one witness that the fight covered an area of 5 houses, with one person chasing the other. I wonder what George has to say about that?
Shano, thanks.
Not only that video — I would like to see all three statements.
Everyone who defends George Zimmerman seems to have an awful lot to say indicating they know that his own version of events must be correct; let’s see it! All that “apeshit” stuff, all Trayvon Martin’s terrible bullying, all Zimmerman’s victimization, let’s see it! Maybe I would drum up some sympathy for the poor guy after all!
Leander, no rush and no urgency. I was just doing my idly-wondering thing. I should also be doing other things right now. I can’t stand thinking about it. I also can’t stop.
Malisha: it would be interesting to see that re-enactment. How much are the police ‘coaching’ Zimmerman to develop a story line that seemed to fit with the evidence at the time. I would love to see this film. I have a weird feeling it will never become public because it will show collusion to cover up a murder.
Here is a very good article that deals more with Marissa Alexander and the SYG laws and required sentencing:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/05/20/149441/leonard-pitts-jr-tough-on-crime.html#storylink=cpy?storylink=addthis
Malisha:
Yes, there were a series of unfortunate circumstances that night that added to the tragic outcome.
The first officer, S1317, was dispatched at: 19:11:17 but only reported on route on: 19:12:13. This was the first cop ordered to dispatch, this is the minute that would have helped to make him arrive in time. Another, S2711, reports immediately on route at the time of being dispatched which is 19:13:27, and I think he is the first at the scene.
I could look up the specific names of the officers but I have to finish an urgent task, and shouldn’t be here anyway.
Sling T, You’re right about Dershowitz’s check-off list, as you say:
“What he is proposing is justice served by a very limited series of checkboxes. One party has more injuries than other. Therefore that party is the victim and the other party the aggressor.”
But I would respectfully point out to His Honor that the party who had more injuries was Trayvon Martin, whose heart was blown to bits by a high-speed piece of metal activated by Zimmerman’s hand.
Edit: Last paragraph, beginning “So what you have” should come out. Sorry.
If Zimmerman were to go to trial and testify that he shot Martin in self-defense, the three statements he made to the police, the 911 calls, the video-taped reenactment, and all of that would come into evidence and be evaluated. The conduct of the police and the testimony of the officers would be examined in minute detail. Possible tape recorded telephone calls of the police officers (Remember Mark Furhman!) to other people in other contexts might even surface. Every kind of thing could be seen and reacted to. Could Zimmerman be acquitted? Not if there was a proper jury AND if the three statements to the police and the video-taped re-enactment were all shown to display gross lying and unexplained things that contradict the physical evidence and witness statements!
What are the goals of the officials, versus the goals of the public, and the defendant, at this moment in time?
My educated guesses:
1. Goals of all the officials in Florida are to have the Sanford Police Department survive this mess. Then the SYG laws and everything else can be dealt with — later.
2. Goals of the public: To see what THEY consider justice done, under the circumstances, and knowing as much as the officials have chosen to tell them. (They will know more if there is a trial and less if there is a plea OR the charges are dropped.)
3. Goals of the Defendant: GET OFF.
If goals 1 and 3 are met, but 2 is not, they would have to make sure it wouldn’t result in a Rodney King type reaction later on. How to do that? Well, one way would be to NEVER let the Zimmerman statements and video get out, and to convince the public that there was no way to win the prosection’s case, and that they had to cave in to avoid frank acquittal. Dershowitz’s public position would help them do this.
If goals 1 and 2 are met, Zimmerman can plead to something small and go away with minor punishment and the feds can be “convinced” [and they may already be helping to design their own convincement on this issue] that the police were assessing things accurately on 2/26/2012 and that’s why they didn’t charge Zimmerman so Lee can come back to his job and all there will be is more smoldering resentment in a community that is being attacked from all sides economically anyway.
Goals 2 and 3 are, in my opinion, incompatible. So I don’t see a third combination available here. I don’t think O’Mara’s taking this to trial because I think HE HAS SEEN the three statements his client made and the video taped reenactment.
So what you have is a scenario now where there is only ONE way for the police
Elaine M.: “While I have the utmost respect for Dershowitz, in this case I have to disagree.”
I didn’t have a prior impression of Dershowitz.
From that opinion, I deduce (fairly) that he is a highly-qualified idiot.
What he is proposing is justice served by a very limited series of checkboxes.
One party has more injuries than other. Therefore that party is the victim and the other party the aggressor.
The man’s a fool.
“The NRA has a wonderfully simple story to tell. In the NRA’s world, people are neatly divided into two readily identifiable groups: good guys and bad guys. In this imaginary world, we know that legal carriers of guns must be good guys and that good guys use their guns only in legitimate self-defense—that’s what makes them good guys in the first place.”
That’s been a problem from the beginnings of this case.
All the early reports spoke a “Watch Captain” shooting someone.
Well, game set and match – the person he shot must obviously be a bad guy.
That sort of think must have affected the cops who turned up.
There’s Zimmerman, the guy who called in – and is the “watch Captain”.
There’s this dead young black guy that nobody knows.
Easy.
Tony C: One more thought.
Otherwise, if a person decides to aggress upon another, and the aggressor is armed, and the other is unarmed, there are legally only three ways it can end:
Aggressor just plain kills victim without objection and is guilty;
Aggressor aggresses, victim fights back, does some damage, but ultimately loses, is killed, and aggressor is NOT GUILTY by reason of victim’s self-defensive efforts.
Aggressor aggresses, victim fights back and manages to kill the aggressor, and would-be victim is — WHAT? SYG, SYG, where are you?
A persistent logical problem with the Zimmerman case is the irrational assumption that Zimmerman should have been seen as having only the best motives and therefore Martin should not have objected to anything he might have perceived as aggression on Zimmerman’s part. People on the blogs have said that Martin should not have gone “apeshit.” There is the presumption that if he had not gone “apeshit,” Zimmerman would not have killed him. Well, we do not know that he DID go “apeshit” and we don’t know what Zimmerman’s demeanor or intentions (or perhaps absence of intentions by reason of great emotional disturbance or something) were at the point of contact.
I heard many radio discussions during the hey-day of the news coverage wherein African Americans called in to explain that they had taught their children how to respond to unwarranted police stops and queries; but Zimmerman was not police! In almost everybody’s mind was the weird assumption that Martin might have imagined Zimmerman was some sort of validly authorized agent of good government or neighborhood care; but even his saying so (which he obviously didn’t) wouldn’t have meant much after his behavior early on in the encounter.
Just as Grossman had no right to follow the officer back to her vehicle and start a fight, Zimmerman had no right to follow Martin all over and start a fight. The fact that the victim of Grossman’s crime was above reproach of course led to the immediate arrest (once they found him!) and prosecution of the shooter. I think the fact that the police were willing, from the beginning, to consider Martin a throw-away casualty of our crime-ridden times led to their mismanagement of the whole case, but I don’t think it can lead to a successful acquittal for self-defense.
shit: Zimmerman wasn’t a simply taking
Manny, your scenario has one flaw, Zimmerman wasn’t a simple taking a promenade at the time. This must have been obvious for Trayvon too.
It clearly should have been in Z’s own interest to keep matters civil. After all he knew that police would arrive soon, T. didn’t, Z’s only fear under the circumstances was T. could get away without being checked by police. It feels the normal thing to do would have been to start a polite conversation. Simply tell him about the many burglaries and tell him he belonged to the Neighborhood Watch, this should have dispelled T’s fears too. He couldn’t know after all, who Zimmerman was,why he was following him. On the other hand Z. had formed a rigid idea in his head about T’s intentions.
Who was the person that was first on the site, speaking to Zimmerman? Was it one of the community’s block captains? He was the one taking the photo, remember, the first with a flashlight and he spoke to Zimmerman shortly before the police arrived. Could well be the flashlight on the scene is his and he forgot to pick it up after taking the photo.
Tony C, I apologize for the misunderstanding immediately — God forbid! I was not claiming Grossman was innocent; he was 100% guilty of second-degree murder (and maybe even first-degree murder, I’m not sure on that one because I never saw the trial transcripts) and I said so even in my comment on the thread! What I was comparing was the fact that he formed his intent to kill without thinking: “OK, I want to kill her now.” The part I had in his case was NOT defending him; he was convicted of FIRST DEGREE murder with enhancements. I was involved in trying to prevent his execution, as I have been involved in trying to prevent the execution of other guilty murderers, and if Zimmerman were charged with First Degree and convicted and sentenced to death, I swear to you right now I would be seeking clemency for HIM, too. (I’m against the death penalty and I’m on those list-serves and most of the cases are from Florida or Texas.)
I am not making the argument that Grossman was innocent. I believe he was guilty of murdering an innocent law enforcement officer, and life in prison without parole would have been appropriate, probably. The I.Q. and the rest of it had to do with the application of “enhancements” to his crime that got him the death penalty. All my research indicated that even if the death penalty WERE to be acceptable, it should not have been applied to him because of the many factors that were ignored as a result of his not having private lawyers on his case until it was too late. (Typical story; it was about money and family.)
See, what I was comparing was the fact that once there is a struggle and an undeniable basis for the aggressor (Grossman) to feel fear, even then, an act of aggression that results in the death of the person aggressed UPON, under FLORIDA LAW, is not self-defense. It is murder.