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
Carol,
“Elaine, Zimmerman did listen to the dispatcher. He answered all his questions and stopped following Martin when told he didn’t need to do that. You have no proof he continued to follow Martin. The police have no witnesses as who hit who first.”
Read my post at 1:03 pm.
David,
I have to agree with your post that points out the strangeness surrounding Martin’s girlfriend’s story about her conversation with him. It does seem to be slowly evolving over time as bits and pieces are fed to the public. Has anyone here actually heard the original phone conversation? Is there a credible link to it?
David Larry,
“Once again you seem to be under the impression that if you are followed, you can legally batter that person. Is that correct?”
Once again you don’t understand the point I was trying to make and put words in my mouth.
*****
“And Martin didn’t have the same obligation? (Sorry, I forgot that you consider following someone to justification of the use of force.)”
Zimmerman was following Martin and refused to identify himself. After the dispatcher told Zimmerman they didn’t need him to follow Martin, he continued to do so.
*****
Overall, the newly released material paints the most complete picture yet of how investigators built the case, as well as its complexity. The police perspective was most succinctly stated in a March 13 “capias request” — a request that someone be taken into custody — sent to the state’s attorney. It speaks to the fact that Zimmerman ignored a police dispatcher’s advice not to chase Martin, as well as his communications with Martin prior to the shooting.
“The encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement, or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog (sic) in an effort to dispel each party’s concern” the request said. “There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity.”
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/17/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html
*****
It continued: “When the police dispatcher realized Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, he instructed Zimmerman not to do that and that the responding officer would meet him. Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin who was trying to return to his home.”
“Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued,” prosecutors said in their account.
http://news.yahoo.com/atty-zimmerman-bail-hearing-held-next-week-073115947.html
I found an autopsy example that discusses the issues of range with regard to autopsy terms of art. It is not related to the effective accuracy / use range of a handgun:
(Adult Autopsies).
Elaine, Zimmerman did listen to the dispatcher. He answered all his questions and stopped following Martin when told he didn’t need to do that. You have no proof he continued to follow Martin. The police have no witnesses as who hit who first.
Carol,
The can of tea was still in Martin’s hoodie pocket. It was removed by one of the first-responders.
Zimmerman should try to think before saying stuff.
“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),..”
In most parts of the world, house numbers are on the fronts of houses – not at the rear. This is a very sensible arrangement.
If house numbers were at the rear of houses, it would be impossible to walk or drive along a street looking for a particular house number. If the numbers were at the rear visitors, delivery services and trades persons would have to alight from transport and walk along the rears of houses.
All in all, house numbers at the fronts of houses are a great idea. Humanity owes a huge debt of gratitude to the imaginative person who came up with the idea.
If Zimmerman got out just to check house numbers, then Martin must have dragged him around behind that row of houses.
I really don’t understand Prof Turley’s point about Zimmerman’s injuries. We all know there was a fight.
It seems clear that Zimmerman was coming off worst. So what if he has injuries?
Coming off worst in a fight that a person has provoked does not excuse that person from shooting dead the person who was winning.
Prof Turley and others seem to think that the fact of the fight means that Zimmerman was an innocent person out for a stroll who was the victim of an unprovoked attack.
That’s insane.
Zimmerman claiming that he only got out to check house numbers makes him look like an idiot who is inventing a story.
DL needs to catch up but I am waiting for voice recognition to settle this….
DL, Trayvon asked why he was being followed and did not get an answer.
We have Zimmerman stating that he was calling out for help, and we have an eyewitness who saw him calling out for help. We also have a reason for Zimmerman to be calling out for help.
Martin was not calling out for help because Zimmerman was following him. If he had been, his girlfriend would have said that she heard him doing so.
Zimmerman had plenty of time to walk around the grounds, witnesses say he was pacing after the shooting. He could have put them anywhere he wanted at that crime scene. You speculate & so will I. Martins pants had different, deeper or closed pockets, the headphones kept everything else in place, etc.
David Larry,
Thanks for pointing that fact out to shano. She should listen to the 911 call Zimmerman made to the police department.
shano, among other things, Martin had in his pockets a lighter, a photo button, headphones, forty dollars and fifteen cents. All of these things were taken from Martin’s pockets. None of them fell out on the ground. Zimmerman’s keys were found in the grass between the buildings. If they were rolling around, as you allege, at least some of the things in Martin’s pockets would have been on the ground too, but they weren’t. You say a witnesses recalled that keys can fall out of your pocket if you trip. So what? Did she see Zimmerman’s keys fall out of his pocket? I still believe evidence points to the fact that Zimmerman was going to his car and had his keys in his hand.
shano,
“David Larry, stalking is a crime. Zimmerman was stalking Trayvon and refusing to identify himself.”
What constitutes the crime of stalking? Has Zimmerman been charged with the crime of stalking?
Was Zimmerman asked to identify himself? By whom?
Have we seen any pictures of Zimmerman with the black eyes that the doctors report suggested? I may have missed them so if somebody has seen them please give me the link! Thanks.
Elaine,
“His actions provoked the response by Trayvon Martin.”
Once again you seem to be under the impression that if you are followed, you can legally batter that person. Is that correct?
“He should have listened to the police dispatcher.”
Do you have any evidence to support that he didn’t? What did the police say to Zimmerman, and what was his response?
“He should have waited for the police to arrive.” And Martin didn’t have the same obligation? (Sorry, I forgot that you consider following someone to justification of the use of force.)
“He should not have been carrying a firearm. People involved with neighborhood watches are not supposed to carry guns.”
That has to be one of the most consistently ignorant comments I see buzzing around the internets. Zimmerman, by all accounts, was on his way to the store. He was not out on patrol as a member of the Neighborhood Watch. Do you think Neighborhood Watch GUIDELINES effect members 24-7? In other words, when someone volunteers to be a member of the Neighborhood Watch, do you think they no longer have a right to legally carry a concealed weapon?
Thank you so much for answering my questions.
It isn’t self-defense if you start the fight or altercation.
Elaine,
I was reading your link and wondering who elected or assigned Zimmerman the title of “neighborhood watch captain”? Sounds like an attempt to make him seem official, instead of the stalker vigilante that he appears to be to me.
I think the distance of the gunshot will be answered by some actual measurements using Zimmerman’s gun or one like it. They have pictures of the residue on Martin for a match. And, if Martin was on top of Zimmerman, why was there none of Martin’s blood on him? Or at least it hasn’t been mentioned.
Bottom line: Al Sharpless, Jesse Jackazz, and Hussein Obama are no longer discussing Trayvon Martin as a “victim” and that means THERE IS NO CASE AGAINST ZIMMERMAN HERE. PERIOD. And to think of the millions and millions of taxpayer dollars being spent trying to prove a hate-crime when the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates what intelligent people perceived all along: that Zimmerman told the truth and he acted in self-defense. It’s just disgusting. The Leftists, the Obamazoids, the Liberal NIMBYs, and Media have tried to spread lies, but the truth is winning out here.
Tony C.,
From The Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0517/Trayvon-Martin-case-new-documents-paint-complicated-picture-video
Investigators sent all the recordings to the FBI for analysis. They were asked to determine who was screaming, and also if Zimmerman might have used an expletive in describing Martin. Prosecutors said in their charging documents that Zimmerman said “(expletive) punks” in describing Martin as he walked in the neighborhood.
But the analyst who examined the recordings determined the sound quality is too poor to decipher what Zimmerman uttered. In regards to the screams during the altercation, there also wasn’t enough clarity to determine who it is “due to extreme stress and unsuitable audio quality.”
anon nurse,
Larry doesn’t seem to understand that my questions WERE a response to his questions. I guess he just didn’t get the point I was trying to make using rhetorical questions.
So it goes…