by Patrick H. Moore
Although the Seminole County Courtroom is dark today in honor of Independence Day, things will resume on Friday morning in the second-degree-murder trial of George Zimmerman. The prosecution has announced that it intends to rest its case in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on Friday.
I’m fully aware that half the nation — those who believe that Zimmerman grossly overstepped his authority by “stalking” and then shooting Martin — are muttering through clenched teeth: “What case?” Their frustration over the prosecution’s apparent failure to build a strong case against Zimmerman is palpable.
The other half of the nation — those who believe that charges should never have been brought against the embattled Neighborhood Watch Commander in the first place — are, by this point, probably exchanging grim high-fives and ejaculating: “I told you so. They’ve got no case.”
I personally am wondering what lead prosecutor John Guy is thinking as his “trainwreck” of a prosecution limps to a close. After all, he’s the one who shocked the more gentle souls among us by dropping a string of F-Bombs in his opening statement and stating:
“The truth about the murder of Trayvon Martin is going to come directly from his mouth.”
Admittedly, the prosecution has succeeded in pointing out certain inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s story, which, according to Fabiola Santiago of the Miami Herald, include:
- On the night of the shooting, Zimmerman told Sanford Police investigator Doris Singleton that he couldn’t remember the position of Trayvon Martin’s body after he was shot. Yet, in another interview, “Zimmerman claimed he spread out Trayvon’s arms after the shooting, but a photo taken immediately after the shooting shows Martin face down with his arms under his body.”
- Zimmerman told Singleton that Trayvon jumped out at him from bushes, but during the scene walk-through and re-creation the next day, there are only spare bushes and Zimmerman doesn’t mention them. He says Trayvon came up from behind buildings.
- It has been revealed that Zimmerman took a class that addressed Florida’s self-defense law ”even though he claimed he didn’t in an interview with talk show host Sean Hannity. The interview was played for the jurors.”
![guns]()
Mark Osterman, a friend who spoke with Zimmerman after the shooting, stated under oath “that Zimmerman told him Martin had grabbed his gun during their struggle, but that Zimmerman was able to pull it away.” That account contradicts what Zimmerman told investigators in multiple interviews. “In those interviews, Zimmerman only said it appeared Martin was reaching for his gun prior to the shooting. He never told police the teen grabbed it.”
- “I thought he had said he grabbed the gun,” Osterman said. “I believe he said he grabbed the gun.”
- A Sanford Police Department fingerprint examiner testified that none of Martin’s prints were found on the gun.
In addition, Dr. Valerie Rao, a medical examiner who had reviewed evidence concerning Zimmerman’s injuries, testified that Zimmerman’s injuries were insignificant, bolstering the prosecution’s claims that Zimmerman’s life wasn’t in jeopardy during his fight with Martin:
“They were so minor that the individual who treated and examined Mr. Zimmerman decided stitches weren’t required,” Rao said.
So in fairness to the prosecution, it must be acknowledged that they have certainly succeeded in demonstrating a number of inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s story. What they have not done, however, is cast his entire story in doubt, they have not succeeded in discrediting him, which is what it would take to convince the sequestered jury to convict Zimmerman on the second-degree-murder charge.
If Zimmerman is acquitted, and at this point the smart money would probably give odds that he will be, the question will inevitably be raised: Why was the prosecution unable to build a stronger case? Why did they fail to point out the GLARING INCONSISTENCIES between what Zimmerman told the 911 dispatcher and what he told law enforcement the following day during the complex walk-through that was memorialized on the Re-enactment video? A careful comparison of the 911 tape with the Re-enactment video would demonstrate, among other things, that Zimmerman was apparently out of his truck and following Martin on foot even before the police dispatcher told him not to follow the youth. The fact of the matter appears to be that Zimmerman was bound and determined to do whatever it took to “nail” Trayvon Martin, even if “nailing him” meant shooting him at point-blank range.
If the prosecution was to strengthen its case by demonstrating the strong probability that Zimmerman was acting in bad faith during the 911 call, as demonstrated by what he told law enforcement during the Re-enactment walk-through, that still does not mean that the jury would convict him. The fact that there are no eyewitnesses who actually saw Zimmerman attack Trayvon Martin has always seemed to me to be an insurmountable obstacle.
But as things now stand, it appears that the prosecution has simply failed to utilize all the evidence at its disposal. And this, it would seem, is just plain bad lawyering.
Click here to read our earlier George Zimmerman trial posts:
George “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” Zimmerman Had a History of Violence
Why the Case Against George Zimmerman Is Strong Enough for a Conviction
George Zimmerman Unlikely to Be Convicted of 2nd-Degree Murder
George Zimmerman Trial: Top Five Moments in First Week of Testimony
George Zimmerman Trial: John Good’s Testimony Is “Good News” for Zimmerman
George Zimmerman Trial: Key State Witness Rachel Jeantel Goes Toe-to-Toe with Zimmerman Defense Team
George Zimmerman Was on a Dangerous Drug Cocktail at Time of Trayvon Martin’s Shooting Death
George Zimmerman Trial: Trayvon Martin Death Photos Dominate Day 12
Sanford, FL Has a History of Brutal Racial Oppression