In Zimmerman Trial Prosecution, Witnesses Bolster Self-Defense Claims
Pool photo by Joe Burbank
A photo introduced as evidence showing George Zimmerman arriving at a police station the night of Trayvon Martin’s death.
By LIZETTE ALVAREZ
Published: June 30, 2013
SANFORD, Fla. — As the trial of George Zimmerman enters its second week on Monday, it appears that the prosecution is struggling to meet the burden of proving him guilty of second-degree murder, legal analysts said.
The first week of the trial featured testimony from prosecution witnesses that in many instances bolstered Mr. Zimmerman’s argument of self-defense rather than the state’s case, the analysts said.
“When you are talking about state witnesses as if they are defense witnesses, that is a problem for the State of Florida,” said Diana Tennis, a prominent Orlando defense lawyer who is following the case. “And any time you end each day with either a zero-sum game or the defense coming out ahead, that’s a problem when you’re the prosecution.”
In light of the first week, analysts said that prosecutors should have charged Mr. Zimmerman with manslaughter instead of second-degree murder, which involves a showing of hatred, spite or evil intent. The jury can still consider manslaughter, but doing so could complicate closing arguments and deliberations.
“The state is overreaching, and I think that may well come back to bite them in terms of credibility,” said Michael Band, a longtime Miami prosecutor and now a defense lawyer.
On Feb. 26, 2012, Mr. Zimmerman, 29, who is half-Peruvian, shot and killed Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black 17-year-old, as he walked on a rainy night through the housing complex where he was a guest. Mr. Zimmerman, the coordinator of the volunteer neighborhood watch program, said he shot Mr. Martin after the teenager knocked him to the ground, punched him and slammed his head into the pavement repeatedly.
The prosecution argued that Mr. Zimmerman “profiled” Mr. Martin, pursued him despite being told not to do so by a police dispatcher, and acted as the aggressor in the fight, which left Mr. Martin dead.
The week was not entirely bad news for prosecutors: their opening statement was passionate and strong. The friend who last spoke to Mr. Martin, Rachel Jeantel, said repeatedly from the witness stand that Mr. Martin was being followed and heard him say, “Get off,” before the phone went dead. Mr. Martin’s hands showed no blood or significant wounds. Mr. Zimmerman’s wounds did not appear to be life-threatening.
The prosecution’s case could get stronger this week. The state is expected to delve into inconsistencies in Mr. Zimmerman’s statements to the police.
Mr. Zimmerman, for example, said that Mr. Martin had scared him, yet he got out of his car and followed the teenager. He initially told the police that Mr. Martin had popped out of bushes, but there are no bushes near that spot. And Mr. Zimmerman said he got out of his car because he could not tell the dispatcher the name of the street, even though the housing complex has only three streets. Defense lawyers will probably try to minimize inconsistencies by saying their client had experienced a traumatic episode.
The prosecution is also expected to call Chris Serino, the Sanford police officer who was the lead investigator in the case. Mr. Serino, who said Mr. Zimmerman had a “little hero complex” and felt his statements sounded “scripted,” recommended a manslaughter charge.
But that testimony could get complicated. Mr. Serino later told the F.B.I. that he had been pressured to make an arrest. He told the federal agents that he did not think there was enough evidence for a manslaughter charge.
High-ranking officials in the Sanford Police Department and the original state attorney in the case agreed: they decided not to arrest or charge Mr. Zimmerman in February and March because they felt they lacked enough evidence to rebut self-defense.
Mr. Zimmerman was arrested six weeks after the shooting, and only after a special prosecutor from Jacksonville was appointed by the governor. By then, the shooting had set off protests and turned into a civil rights issue.
Mr. Zimmerman’s actions after the shooting could also pose a problem for prosecutors this week. Immediately after the shooting, Mr. Zimmerman cooperated with the police, admitted to shooting in self-defense and gave days of statements without asking for a lawyer.
At the end of the trial’s first week, Mr. Zimmerman defense team clearly had the advantage, although a jury’s collective thinking is often unpredictable, legal experts said.
The defense scored a number of points during cross-examination. It showcased Mr. Zimmerman’s injuries, including a “likely” broken nose, as a physician assistant testified. The first police officer to arrive on the scene said that Mr. Zimmerman’s back and jeans were wet and that his jacket had bits of grass, suggesting he was on his back at some point. The officer also said that Mr. Zimmerman told him he had been yelling for help.
In addition, the resident with the best view of the altercation that night said the person “with lighter skin color” in red or white was being straddled on the ground by someone wearing dark colors. (Mr. Zimmerman was wearing a red jacket.) The witness further described a “ground and pound.” The person on the top, he said, was moving his arms in a downward motion (though the witness added he did not see actual punches).
And the jury learned that Ms. Jeantel’s first interview with Bernie de la Rionda, the chief prosecutor, took place in the home of Mr. Martin’s mother, Sybrina Fulton, with Ms. Fulton sitting next to her. The setting, Ms. Jeantel acknowledged, skewed her story, which was likely to dent her credibility.
“I don’t know what he was thinking,” Mr. Band said, of Mr. de la Rionda. “It makes no sense.”
A version of this article appeared in print on July 1, 2013, on page A15 of the New York edition with the headline: Witnesses for Prosecution in Zimmerman Trial Bolster Claims of Self-Defense.