Aram Roston of The Daily Beast has George Zimmerman's account of Trayvon Martin's last words, as well as leaks from law enforcement officials familiar with the case.
As has been reported, Zimmerman told police officials that he lost sight of Martin and went around a townhouse to see where he was. Then he claimed Martin confronted him and punched him, knocking him down.
According to The Daily Beast’s source, Zimmerman told police that when he was on the ground, Martin straddled him, striking him, and then tried to smother him.
Zimmerman claimed that he yelled for help, and that various neighbors who peered out to see the fight from their backyards didn’t get involved. Zimmerman, the source said, told officers he was so paralyzed by fear that he initially forgot he had a gun, but he said that after Martin noticed his 9mm pistol, Zimmerman pulled it out of his belt holder and fired one round, a hollow-point—the round that killed Martin. (The autopsy report on Martin has not yet been released.)
According to the source, Zimmerman told police that Martin’s last words after the shooting were, “Okay, you got it.” He said the phrase twice, then turned and fell face-down on the ground.
(Martin’s father told reporters last month that police had told him his son’s last words were, “You got me.” Benjamin Crump, the family’s lawyer, said he doesn’t believe either account.)
That seems to broadly match the story the father told.
According to the source, Zimmerman told police he didn’t realize that Martin was seriously injured, and that he lunged to get on top of him after the teenager fell to the ground. Moments later, a police officer from Sanford arrived, placed him in handcuffs and took his gun.
OK, that is a new detail which may explain Ms. Cutcher, who saw Zimmerman above Martin after the gunshot.
Here is one for the voice experts:
Then there are the dramatic cries for help heard on the 911 call during the struggle. Martin’s mother said it was her son’s voice, and the special prosecutor in the case agrees. But Zimmerman’s supporters argue that the pleas came from him.
The source familiar with the case said that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigators had Zimmerman lie on his back in another location in an effort to recreate the position he said he had been in during the shooting. Then, the source said, investigators recorded Zimmerman as he shouted what had been heard on the 911 calls: cries such as, “Help me!”
Well, well - I have argued that unless the police waterboarded Zimmerman they were unlikely to get credible screaming from him, and the audio forensic experts say that matching speech to screams doesn't work. Who knew that Zimmerman would volunteer to scream? Well, he took a long time to lawyer up. And does the Miranda warning say "Anything you scream may be used against you"? I don't think so. That said, this opens the possibility that the investigators actually had something an audio expert could work with, and that the matching effort came out against Zimmerman.
Interesting - voice evidence wasn't mentioned in the arrest affidavit but could explain the attitude of the prosecutor. As to whether this hypothetical voice matching can survive a defense effort to reject it at trial, who knows? My guess is the defense will look for experts to say that screams under true duress, such as in a fight, can't be mimicked voluntarily. Is that true? Beats me.
Zimmerman is the dumbest and most cooperative guilty man in America if he is making his story up. Or maybe he is experiencing PTSD and post-concussive memory loss. Move to dismiss!
Here is a heck of a concession from the Martin family attorney:
Crump said it was not clear that Martin threw the first punch but, argued that even if he did, Zimmerman’s actions launched the entire sequence of events. “Trayvon Martin had every right to stand his ground,” Crump said. “We believe that Trayvon went to his grave not knowing who this strange man was that was approaching and confronting him.”
"Not clear"? If they are entertaining the notion that Martin did throw the first punch, that is helpful for Zimmerman. Let's further note that "approaching and confronting" aren't "punching"; not to sound crazy or anything, but instead of punching Zimmerman a calm "Just headed back to my house to watch the ball game" might have been a better response. Promoting a message of calm and restraint might even be a better way to honor Trayvon's memory.
Oh,oh!
Getting interesting now that O'Mara is going to challenge aspects of the affadavit with one of the investigators.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM
O'Mara about to blow this whole thing open.
Posted by: scott | April 20, 2012 at 10:12 AM
O'Mara is latching on to the grammar of using the word "profiling" and why was it used. This guy is good and the State looks like a bunch of Inspector Clouseau wannabes.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 20, 2012 at 10:13 AM
Now her animus is being revealed.
I think what is being revealed is another part of her, but maybe that is just me...
Posted by: GMAX | April 20, 2012 at 10:13 AM
If you are Angela Corey, Gilbreath's testimony is painful to watch. You are looking at your boat leaking like a sieve and you have no bucket to bail. Dershowitz must be smiling like a Cheshire cat watching the affadavit being "fisked" into shreds by O'Mara.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 20, 2012 at 10:18 AM
Work is interfering with my study of this case. :(
Posted by: Ignatius J Donnelly | April 20, 2012 at 10:19 AM
-- This guy is good and the State looks like a bunch of Inspector Clouseau wannabes. --
The state's issues have been apparent from piecing together the public evidence. The charging affidavit doesn't track with the 911 call and statements of SPD.
Sounds like O'Mara is attempting to get the state to particularly describe the accusation of "depraved mind." If the state can't do that, it concedes its murder charge.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:19 AM
The person who took the photo will have to testify at trial to get it into evidence. I assume he will do so.
I believe it was the photographer who said the vertical red line at the left side of the wound is a trickle of blood.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 10:20 AM
-- If you are Angela Corey, Gilbreath's testimony is painful to watch. --
She shoulda coached 'em better.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:21 AM
I thought I was started to get it, but now I am confused by legal procedure labels, sequence and functions.
Is this just a bail hearing? Is it also called an Arthur hearing? Can the case be dismissed today for failing to meet the preponderance of evidence requirement? And what about immunity?
I need a flow chart.
Posted by: AliceH | April 20, 2012 at 10:21 AM
-- The person who took the photo will have to testify at trial to get it into evidence. I assume he will do so. --
The photo ABC is showing is from a private citizen. The defense will use the photos by SPD, not private photos. Simpler issues with origin, custody, tampering, etc. and covers exactly the same observations.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:22 AM
-- Is this just a bail hearing? Is it also called an Arthur hearing? --
Yes, bail only. Bail hearing and Arthur hearing are synonyms (in FL).
-- Can the case be dismissed today for failing to meet the preponderance of evidence requirement? --
No. The preponderance of evidence standard pertains to showing self defense, by Zimmerman, at a separate hearing. O'Mara has not moved for immunity yet, that we know of.
But, the state does have to show that it has evidence for every element of its case. It can be flimsy evidence, but it can't be zero evidence.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Is this morphing from a bail hearing into something else?
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 20, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:26 AM
After the expected aquittal, are federal charges a certainty, do you think?
Posted by: Ignatius J Donnelly | April 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM
-- Is this morphing from a bail hearing into something else? --
No. This is the Arthur hearing, as described a few days ago. This isn't unexpected ground at all. The state has to put on a substantive argument, including identification of evidence and witnesses.
I assume that "Gilbreath are talking about an unnamed witness in the case. Gilbreath says the witness was not interviewed until 'five weeks' after the incident." is a reference to DeeDee. O'Mara is damaging the credibility of DeeDee by the sheer delay in obtaining her statement.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM
So far, two words come to mind about the prosecution and their affidavit...bad faith.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 20, 2012 at 10:30 AM
-- After the expected aquittal, are federal charges a certainty, do you think? --
It will depend on how the media covers the case. If it doesn't report facts, but instead continues to publish a fictionalizes narrative, I can see the Feds charging. But if the public comes to see Zimmerman as not a racist, the feds won't charge.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:31 AM
-- two words come to mind about the prosecution and their affidavit...bad faith. --
Unless they have evidence that we are completely unaware of, I agree. Politically motivated charge - illegal under Florida law.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Sorry to interrupt commentary but Top 25 media blows it hyping envmt complete with videos is too entertaining not to link.
cboldt-the official documentation I have says in place by 2020.
po-I will disclose it once red gets diploma in May and I start blogging. I cannot wait for everything in book and this gets aspects of what is really going on out there and brings attention I will need for book. I also have a huge revelation that will rock kim's world and needs to come out before rio. Will be a busy summer.
But I am angry about what I saw yesterday in a way nothing else quite created. And mel will not be shocked to know it tracked back to Illinois.
Posted by: rse | April 20, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Well, you didn't use a different word, and you have plenty of time to think about. What different word would you use, Glibreath?
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM
"The defense will use the photos by SPD"
I haven't seen any SPD photos that show the wounds this clearly (although there may well be some). If the defense calls the photographer hecan authenticate the photo--"this is what I saw, I took this picture; it accurately represents what I saw."
Seems clear that the head struck the pavement at least twice.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM
" O'Mara is damaging the credibility of DeeDee by the sheer delay in obtaining her statement."
It takes time to make up and polish a story to fit the narrative that also kinda fits the timeline.
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM
Did they start the hearing with a prayer for the Martins?
Posted by: Extraneus | April 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM
http://www.npr.org/2012/04/20/151017973/examining-media-coverage-of-the-trayvon-martin-case
The audio is up now. I know it was posted before it is now buried.
Listen to this. Should we be surprised?
Posted by: Ignatius J Donnelly | April 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM
Surprisingly weak, De Rionda can establish that there was a struggle,
Posted by: narciso | April 20, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Oh, she's had plenty o' help.
Posted by: Ignatius J Donnelly | April 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM
Corey's second mistake:Not agreeing to bail.
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 10:46 AM
"Now de la Rionda stands up.
"I'm sorry, I didn't know we were going to be trying the case today.""
Posted by: Steny C | April 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM
'We were informed there would be no math involved' wait can you crossexamine a statement the defendant makes
Posted by: narciso | April 20, 2012 at 10:57 AM
Narcisco, you owe me a keyboard.
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 20, 2012 at 11:05 AM
Sorry about that, Po, but Gilbreath, really was not prepared, this day.
Posted by: narciso | April 20, 2012 at 11:10 AM
After the expected aquittal, are federal charges a certainty, do you think?
Only if Obama is re-elected
Posted by: Jane (where is Jon Corzine?) | April 20, 2012 at 11:22 AM
Oh I think it would be less likely if he had no worries about reelection.
Posted by: Ignatius J Donnelly | April 20, 2012 at 11:24 AM
If there's a dismissal before trial, and the Feds still bring charges, there should be a revolt.
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 20, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Btw, the uneven quality, of the Journal, besides that terrible poll, is seen in one
hack Op Ed by Alan Blinder, is there any other kind,'Rights are Fine, but Bills must be
Paid' re Health Care, and a very fine review
by Christina Shelton, about a book about Alger Hiss,
Posted by: narciso | April 20, 2012 at 12:28 PM
George Zimmerman granted $150K bond, apologizes to Trayvon Martin's family
Posted by: Extraneus | April 20, 2012 at 12:33 PM
"Not showing evidence is a concession that there is at least reasonable doubt. If the prosecutor believes it cannot prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, then it is unethical to charge the suspect."
Posted by: cboldt
Unless, of course, your goal is to morally allow a poor black couple who lost their child to make a boatload of money for their suffering...
At this point, that seems to be the only thing going on here - there is no 2nd degree. There is no "unlawfully" described in the Affidavit, there is no "disregard" described in the affidavit and there is no "depraved heart" described in the affidavit. All there is are the 'feelings' or 'assumptions' of the prosecution based off a retelling of the story by "DeeDee" who didnt talk to a single person about any of this until March 17th (and was refusing to talk to any authority figure under oath until talking to the Feds sometime around April 5th.
Meanwhile, Crump has the Martin family trademarking "Trayvon Martin", "I Am Trayvon" while claiming "all we want is an arrest" (which allows them to file against Zimmerman themselves)
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 12:56 PM
"That photo was taken two years ago and he looks about as scary as Mickey Mouse"
Ahh, okay...
Well, maybe you feel he seems scarier in the Fight-Club video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0wELTLnTWnA
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 01:00 PM
Oh, and I don't see the question again while skimming the posts, but above someone talked about "John" and how he said "I believe"
What he actually said is "I believe it was red" (meaning the sweatshirt)
and he followed by saying he called cops watched again and the guy who had been on top was on the ground. (Martin now laying on the ground)
So yeah, maybe he couldn't tell his Reds from Dark Oranges or Burnt Ambers in the dark of a raining night in his recollection - but that hardly changes who he saw where
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 01:06 PM
All you need to know about the attack Zimmerman crowd.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/04/20/left-wing-teachers-planning-occupy-the-justice-department-protest-to-demand-cop-killer-mumia-abu-jamal-be-set-free/
Posted by: pagar | April 20, 2012 at 01:18 PM
Italiacto
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 01:22 PM
Oh wonderful, who we let go,
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/04/two_uighur_gitmo_det.php
Posted by: narciso | April 20, 2012 at 01:29 PM
Well, maybe you feel he seems scarier in the Fight-Club video?
I've seen that. He seems to be the kid standing next to the cameraman. Everyone thinks TM is the ref.
Posted by: Ignatius J Donnelly | April 20, 2012 at 01:55 PM
"I've seen that. He seems to be the kid standing next to the cameraman. Everyone thinks TM is the ref"
He is the ref - you can spot where his Tats are. You can also tell because he is the only 6'1"+ person in the crowd. Being someone who was over 6 foot in highschool - I can tell you I was similarly the only one at that time.
By the way, not that it is important, but the photo you said was "2 years old" was actually posted by Zimmerman 3 months before the incident. He also has his tats and gold grill during this time - unless you feel he got his gold teeth and tattoos at 14?
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 02:06 PM
BBB sweetie, just stop using italics...
Posted by: cathyf | April 20, 2012 at 04:45 PM
"Ok, you got it" sucks for last words, but if they were fighting and M grabbed the gun trying to take it from Z, but Z got the shot off and hit M, Martin would have been saying ok, you've got the gun, I'm done fighting for it now, you don't need to shoot again. As why he would think Martin might still be a threat afterward, it sucks getting a good punch to the face when you didn't brace for it, same goes for getting your head busted on concrete. I've had both happen to me, even if you're moving and talking, your brain is still working on a mix of instinct and impressions of the threats, my friends said I was talking gibberish for a few minutes afterward. If my nose was broke, nearly choked out by M trying to smother my screams, a gunshot just exploded in my gut and I don't know where it went, I can see that being the time to push on and not let him get back on me to finish the job.
Posted by: Allen | April 21, 2012 at 01:15 AM