Cross posted from Frederick Leatherman Law Blog.
The shooter in a self-defense case with an unarmed victim usually claims that he thought the person he killed was armed and reaching for a weapon when he shot and killed him.

Key questions about a flashlight and other aspects of the Trayvon Martin killing (Photo: Jared and Corin / Flickr).
GZ has not made that claim with the exception of his first “apology” to TM’s parents in court at the first bail hearing when he said he thought TM might be armed.
I have been wondering why he hasn’t been claiming all along that he thought TM was armed.
As he was sitting in his vehicle, GZ told the dispatcher that TM was reaching into his waistband as TM was approaching him. He said TM walked past the vehicle, broke into a run, and disappeared from GZ’s view. This statement set up the I-thought-he-was-armed defense.
After he shot and killed TM a few minutes later, he patted him down for a weapon, but did not find one.
He did not admit patting him down. Instead, he said TM was lying face down. He mounted him from behind, grabbed his hands, and stretched TM’s arms out to the side in a Y-position to prevent TM, who was still struggling and cursing him at that point, from reaching his (GZ’s) gun lying nearby in the grass.
We know this story is a lie because TM’s hands were underneath his body when the police arrived at the scene. Both of TM’s lungs were collapsed and he could not push any air through his vocal cords to utter a sound, much less speak a word. More important, TM would have lost consciousness and died instantly after the gunshot destroyed his right ventricle and collapsed both lungs.
A witness told the police that she saw the large man straddling the boy, who was lying face down in the grass, and running his hands up and down the boy’s back. Her description sounds like a search for weapons.
These two established facts lead me to believe that GZ thought TM was armed with some sort of weapon when he got out of his vehicle and set off in pursuit of him to prevent this particular “asshole” and “punk” from getting away like all of the others.
Because GZ believed TM was armed, I have a difficult time believing GZ did not pull his gun out of his holster before he spotted TM and approached him.
I surmise that when he realized after the shooting that TM was not armed, he decided not to claim that he believed TM was armed because such a claim would have been inconsistent with the struggle and screaming. That is, if TM were armed, he would have drawn his weapon during the fight. A claim that he believed TM was reaching for his (TM’s) weapon and he (GZ) killed him to prevent TM from killing him would not withstand scrutiny.
GZ only had a minute or two to scramble together a story to tell the police before they arrived. I think he decided to reject the I-thought-he-was-armed defense, since TM did not have a weapon, and he decided instead to go with the-psycho-Black-gangsta-Mofo-jumped-and-attempted-to-kill-me-with-his-bare-hands defense because he (GZ) had some bleeding injuries from his struggle with TM. Then he replaced the I-thought-he-was-reaching-for-his-gun narrative with the I-felt-him-reaching-for-my-gun-in-my-holster story to conceal that he had already drawn his gun before the physical encounter started.
Because he must have known that an aggressor cannot claim self-defense, he conveniently left out the part that he attacked and attempted to restrain TM. To justify using deadly force in self-defense, he claimed TM attacked him and was slamming his head against the concrete in an effort to kill him. Unfortunately for him, the wounds to the back of his head and the pattern of blood flow depicted in the photograph of the back of his head taken at the scene of the shooting disprove this scenario.
I have been wondering why GZ’s key chain and little flashlight were found next to the N/S sidewalk a few feet south of the T-intersection and close to the tree. This is Item 1 on the Total Station. The flashlight was on.
The rest of the items, including the tan 7/11 bag (Item 2), spent casing (Item 6), GZ’s black tactical flashlight (Item 5) and TM’s cell phone (Item 7) were found close to TM’s body approximately 40 feet south of the intersection.
Why is the key chain and flashlight up near the intersection instead of with the rest of the items?
I have never believed TM attacked GZ at the intersection. I suspect he was hiding in the shadows one or two houses down from the intersection talking to DeeDee on his cell phone when GZ spotted him from the intersection.
I think GZ most likely was running or jogging E/B on the cut-through sidewalk from RVC, where he went to see if TM was running S/B toward the rear entrance to the neighborhood. When he did not see him, he realized TM must have run into the area between the two rows of townhouses. He turned around and retraced his route spotting TM from the intersection.
Here are my 13 questions searching for an answer.
1. Did GZ unholster his gun when he spotted TM and dislodge or drop his key chain and flashlight?
2. Did he grab the flashlight with one hand and the gun with the other?
3. Did he need two hands to grab the gun and drop the flashlight unintentionally as he grabbed the gun?
4. Where was it?
5. Was it hooked to his belt or a belt loop on his pants?
6. Was it in a pocket?
7. Was he holding it?
8. Was it turned on?
9. Why would he risk turning it on, possibly making himself a target, if he believed TM might be armed?
10. If so, when did he turn it on and why?
11. Did he even know that he dropped it?
12. Did he run into the tree, bump and bloody his nose or did TM hit his nose during their struggle?
13. Why is GZ’s 6-inch tactical flashlight near TM’s body?



45 Comments

I think he had the gun in his hand when he left his car. If that’s true, none of your other questions matter, do they?
If GZ were on the stand, I’d ask when he drew his gun. If he isn’t on the stand, I’d ask 4-8 and 11 of the investigating officer. And I’d ask the others rhetorically during summation.
Boxturtle (MOM can’t possibly be silly enough to put GZ on the stand, can he?)
I think GZ has to testify or he has no chance to win.
Of course, I don’t think he has a chance to win, if he does testify, unless the jury decides to disregard the evidence.
That’s basically his only shot.
Many thanks to the Editor for the photo.
I’m not sure GZ can be coached enough to make him safe on the stand. He’s probably lost count of the number of stories he’s told and would be fairly easy to tie into knots with just his public statements. The prosecution would probably take about an hour to destroy his story and his credability. They could do it more quickly, but I’m thinking this would be the high point of their day and they might want to draw it out.
Right now, I think the defenses best chance is reasonable doubt. Tell GZ’s side of the story in the opening remarks, then try to poke holes in anything the prosecution presents that endangers that story.
Boxturtle (The lawyers can’t be corsexamined and I can imply almost anything I want)
Mason, I’m curious: let’s say MOM is no longer representing GZ and you are. How would you proceed with this defense after the hash that has been made of it? Could you salvage it at all? Or would you be basically trying to mitigate the potential sentence?
Mason–
This one’s above my pay grade (especially since I haven’t followed this case, since the beginning).
I would like to make an observation. Personally, I’ve been the victim (if you will) of two violent attacks. One in a “group scenario” (a shooter at a discotheque, as they used to be called), and one as the victim of random assault (one-on-one). Oddly, I handled the latter situation, with a cooler head. But, on any other given day, I imagine that I might have reacted, in reverse.
So, my question is to you, have you guys already covered information that points to the likely answers, or is this more a rhetorical question, that none of us would likely know? (Bear in mind, I don’t pretend to have much knowledge of this case. I’m just beginning to try to get well-versed.)
Thanks.
Mad As Hell
X2
On balance I’m with boxturtle on this (granted all this is speculative) everything I’ve read about him together with what I’ve seen of him leads me to think that once on the stand he’d be very easily goaded into giving the game away.
mfi
14. Did John or anyone else come out and help you restrain Trayvon before you shot him?
15. Is that your voice on the witness’ 911 call saying “Keep Still”, a few seconds before you shoot Trayvon Martin? if not who’s is it?
If we were partnered up prosecuting Zimmerman, I would fight you for the chance to cross examine him and if I lost, I would pick myself up off the floor, spit out my teeth and say to you,
“How about 2 out of three?”
That’s how bad I would want to cross examine him.
I claim guest privileges – so there! Or what with me being the soul of generosity and all we can divvy it up. I’ll take 2 out three plus teeth to decide who gets to be “bad cop”.
mfi
Looks like shooting fish in a barrel to me, but I understand the feeling.
I’m having trouble turning up much information on Judge Lester. I really would like to read up on him. Does anyone know if he lives in Sanford, or in Orlando, which is his wife’s business address?
One bio I found, mentioned that he’s a Vietnam-era combat veteran. Wonder if that would make him more sympathetic to GZ (since he’s probably been in the position of being stalked, or hunted down, so to speak. I’m thinking that I remember that GZ insinuated that he was being pursued by Trayvon, but I could be mistaken about that claim.) Also, sort of interesting is the fact that Lester was a wrestling coach. I would definitely think that would play in Trayvon’s favor. (This is probably old news to you guys, I know.)
Here’s the link to one bio, or resume:
http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/11015444/data/2685132/-/6xolfy/-/Kenneth-Lester-bio.pdf
Mad As Hell
You’re on!
And yet you still think MOM will put GZ on the stand? :-)
Boxturtle (If he does, the tooth fairy is going to be a busy b***h)
Here’s an absolutely damning close-up photograph of the right side of Zimmerman’s face taken at the police station.
HINT: Water flows downhill, so does blood, and that’s not hair coloring in his beard or curling around under his ear.
(H/T to hinkster4ever at my site for bringing it to my attention)
He ain’t sympathetic toward GZ at all. GZ commmitted perjury and then tried to weasel out of it. Judges take that personally. Plus, he’s turning the pre-trial time into a farce. A TV interview?!? Personal security??
I think the judge will have a hard time keeping a straight face if GZ has to face cross exam.
*giggle* Mr. *snort* Zimmerman *snicker* I remind you *guffaw* you are *titter* under oath.
Boxturtle (*BawHAHA*)
BT–
Didn’t know any of that, so I guess I just substantiated that I’ve not kept up with this case, huh?
Saw that they’ve (the prosecution) just released a list of six “secret” witnesses, who really weren’t secret, because they had already self-identified, or something.
Mad As Hell
Amazing. So, the only way for the blood from the small head cut in the back to flow to the front and stagnate in the beard area…is if Z was in an upright position (allowing blood to flow by gravity in this direction).
It will be interesting to see what the forensic experts have to say about the direction of flow and final position of blood.
For comparison purposes, here’s a photograph taken at the scene within minutes after the shooting.
Note the direction of flow.
ha ha ha ha
You said,
Here’s the problem:
The jury will be instructed that the lawyers’s opening statements and closing arguments are not evidence and may not be considered as evidence.
They will be instructed that the evidence consists of the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits that are admitted into evidence by the court.
The verdict must be based only on the evidence admitted at trial.
Now, here’s the rub: To get a self-defense instruction, there must be enough evidence of self-defense admitted at trial such that, if it were believed and accepted as true, the jury would return a verdict of not guilty.
I don’t see Zimmerman getting a self-defense instruction because there isn’t any evidence that supports self-defense, unless he testifies, but if he testifies, he will be subjected to a cross examination that will destroy his credibility because of all of his provably false and conflicting statements.
He be stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place.
Food for thought:
I want to follow-up on a comment I made in my earlier post about minimizing the damage from the molestation accusations during jury selection.
I said,
I’m going to take my comment one step further and say only a racist would have thought up the crazy-Black-teenage-gangsta-assassin-speaking-bad-movie-lines who-tried-to-kill-me-with-his-bare-hands story.
To conceal that racism, he has been desperately depicting himself as a Hispanic-American rather than White because he assumes no one will think he is a racist, if he isn’t White.
Yeah, right.
Like there aren’t any Hispanics who are prejudiced against Blacks.
Yeah, I know the FBI investigation concluded that there isn’t any evidence that GZ is a racist, but all they did was ask a bunch of people if they heard him make racist statements.
I do not consider that a thorough investigation.
Why would friends rat him out, especially if they are racist, and why would he say racist things to strangers?
Agree or disagree?
Not only do I agree, but the FBI has not released a conclusion to their investigation yet.
Mason, I hope you didn’t take my “Shooting fish in a barrel” comment as criticism, it wasn’t meant that way.
I simply imagine you, or any skilled lawyer could soon have GZ tripping over his tongue, since he does so, so often without any instigation whatever.
Speaking of instigation, the fact that the Federal Beureau of Instigation says GZ isn’t a racist is sort of a counter-indicator or whatever you call it, isn’t it?
Mason, I think another option is that some folks revel in being contrarians. I know one lawyer who swears up and down that He Has Seen The Evidence and it shows that GZ will walk. When pressed to show it, he erupts in a flurry of virtual table-pounding before stalking off.
I haven’t been following the case that closely, but having viewed the photographs of GZ’s “injuries,” has anyone floated the possibility that these little scratches and pricks were self-inflicted?
Sure don’t like something I’d expect to see from a man who said his head was being repeatedly slammed to the pavement.
“Yeah, I know the FBI investigation concluded that there isn’t any evidence that GZ is a racist, but all they did was ask a bunch of people if they heard him make racist statements.
I do not consider that a thorough investigation.
Why would friends rat him out, especially if they are racist, and why would he say racist things to strangers?
Agree or disagree?”
I agree that I don’t think that his friends would rat him out. As a matter of fact, if he is a racist, his friends probably are as well, and truly don’t see GZ as a racist (no more than they would call themselves, racists).
I honestly haven’t read enough about the case, to know, for sure. He very well may be.
If not, could he be a “southern law-and-order type,” with a big dab of “machismo,” thrown in the mix. (I hate stereotyping, but I don’t have much direct knowledge.) I understand that his Mother is Peruvian. Now, I have no idea if he has lived his life as an “Hispanic,” or mostly as a Caucasian, like his Father. If the latter is true, the “machismo” tag would probably not be applicable. (All I know, is that he does speak Spanish fairly fluently.)
MAH
Yeah, that’s a problem every lawyer has to deal with. So why not dispense with the opening and closing statements? Because the jury listens to them.
In GZ’s case, he simply can’t afford to recite any of his stories under oath. And he wouldn’t survive cross exam, IMO.
So the lawyer tells whatever story GZ settles upon. During the trial, he attacks any evidence that might conflict with that story and tries to raise reasonable doubt. In his summation, he highlights any successful attack and makes sure that jury is aware that it was only a black male who was shot.
Boxturtle (thinks MOM is going to play the race card)
Agree, mostly. But I’d point out that if you spend enough time around a racist, you’ll know. Them people let things slip in conversation that are normal to them, they think nothing of it.
Boxturtle (notice how I worked in a “them people”?)
Yep. Nice one.
I’m afraid you would both have to fight BDLR for the experience of cross-examining GZ. He was so clearly dying for the chance at the bond hearings. I suspect that the opportunity will never come, though. MOM will have to find a way to get his version in without putting him on the stand.
Looking at those photos again, I see even fewer and more minor scratches or abrasions than I thought I saw. I don’t see how any member of a jury could look at those photos and believe that GZ was in a long fight for his life. His acne seems worse than the scratches, which leads me to believe he really did take Accutane for acne and not just to whiten his skin. A savvy commenter elsewhere pointed out this alternative usage of Accutane as a skin whitener, with unfortunate side effects, some of which GZ had, as I recall on his medical report.
And another little bit of colorful info I didn’t know: Frank Taafe has a criminal record. Old news apparently.
From commenter Hipchick at Democratic Underground:
http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/default.aspx
1997 Charged with battery on unknown party
March 1999 Charged with Domestic Violence, Supervised Visitation Ordered and Restraining Order.
April 1999 Wife finalizes divorce, but she still can’t get rid of him. He beats her up again March 2000.
April 2002 He then starts terrorizing the daughter and son they get a temp restraining order and file DV charges.
1999 Failure to Pay Child Support
In 2008 the wife is still scared and files another domestic violence charge
Apparently he wont even pay tolls.
TAAFFE, FRANCIS BRUCE
DOB: 09/03/1956 DAVID SCOTT GLICKEN, Esquire
Retained
Plaintiff
STATE OF FLORIDA
Charge Information
Charges: TAAFFE, FRANCIS BRUCE
Statute
Level
Date
1. TRESPASS 810.08(2)(A) First Degree – Misd 03/11/2000
2. CR-PETIT THEFT 812.014(3)(A) Second Degree – Misd 03/11/2000
an interesting read for someone looking to catch up
http://zimmermanscall.blogspot.com/p/elephants.html
bcclist.com/2012/05/14/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-court-proceedings-and-trial/
So mom and dad made a site asking for donations
http://robertandgladys.com/
welcome to the twilight zone, where killing a black youth can become an industry
myfoxorlando @MyFoxOrlando
Zimmerman lawyer Mark O’Mara confirms to Fox 35′s @vboey that http://robertandgladys.com is legitimate.#fox35 http://dlvr.it/1w2788
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
looks like they want the donations for themselves as they are on the run from the media and people who do not wish them well.
i’m just amazed at their chutzpah.
The clubhouse video breakdown
http://imgur.com/a/bcAII
Most excellent treasure trove of evidence and information.
Thanks, Tzar.
the work that person put in is admirable to say the least. I tried to go through those videos and it was no picnic. You can imagine my christmas morning grin when I say that album.
Remarkable. As greenwarrior said, their chutzpah is amazing. So now we have O’Mara’s “official” website, GZ’s website and now GZ’s mother father and sister’s website all asking for donations?! Shaking my head….
Begging for donations, so far as I can see, to supposedly protect them from the Great Black Hordes, who have sworn to hunt them down and mercilessly and brutally slay them in their beds while they sleep.
Cuz, of course, we all know and fear the GBH.
But the Zimmermans aren’t racists.
We know that because they told us so.
Just like we know GZ killed in self-defense an unarmed crazed Black gangsta teenager trying to kill him with his bare hands just for the halibut while spouting B movie lines.
We know that because he told us so.
Yeah, right.
These people are nuts.
They certainly are nuts and I can only imagine that the delusional self importance and paranoia is only going to get worse once SZ’z deadend perjury case comes up next week. Also, if O’Mara has any wits left, he better be planning an exit.
Shellie Zimmerman has a lawyer named Kelly Sims, who filed a Notice of Appearance, Waiver of Arraignment and Entry of a Plea of Not Guilty on her behalf.
This means SZ and her lawyer will not have to go to court for the arraignment.
Next up will be discovery motions, pretrial motions, and setting a trial date.
Judge Lester, who was voted one of the best judges in Central Florida by the criminal defense bar in a recently completed poll, will be back in court next week.
One of the first items of business he will have to take up is the pending defense motion to disqualify him from the Zimmerman case.
I predict he will deny that motion.
Next, he might have to decide whether to revoke GZ’s bond for directly/indirectly contacting the Martin family with his “apology” during the Sean Hannity interview.
I have reached this same conclusion, and I believe malignantly so