Zimmerman's Defense Team - Not So Great

by Paul Siciliano


I recognize that there is a good chance that George Zimmerman will not be convicted, but I have to note that I don't think the defense did a great job in their case-in-chief.  I touched on some of the points before so sorry for reiterating them. 

It is ridiculous the number of witnesses the defense called to claim that was Zimmerman screaming on the 911 call, and some of them made ridiculous claims like Zimmerman's uncle who heard the screams out of context and knew it was George.  The credibility of these people was further undermined by those who claimed that "assholes" and "fucking punks" did not show any ill-will or hatred.  That is just contrary to common sense.  The jury should see through that.   Also, the cavalcade of witnesses on the 911 call just drove home the point that people are going to say what they want to believe.  You would expect that from a mother, but mere acquaintances, c'mon. 

Then you have the experts.  The only one that actually had a purpose was Dr. Di Maio who said, in his expert opinion, that the evidence is consistent with Zimmerman's story that Martin was on top at the time of the shooting.  That still misses the point.  There are two crucial parts of the encounter that need to be addressed.  1.) Where and how the fight began, and 2.) How did Zimmerman access his gun?  Zimmerman contradicts himself on the first part by claiming the first punched knocked him to the ground, but then changing the story when he re-enacted it.  Zimmerman's account of the second part goes against the evidence.  Even Zimmerman's own expert, Pollock, said he could not pull the maneuver he claimed.   

Which goes to the other stupidity of the Defense experts - that George Zimmerman is a wuss.  I guess the Defense thought this was clever because no wuss like Zimmerman would ever start an altercation.  Then, why get out of your vehicle and chase someone you believe to be a suspect?  Why want to become a cop? Oh, that's right you have the metal courage which is your gun.  A supposedly unathletic, weak individual with a concealed weapon with a bullet ready in the chamber is not a good picture for the Defense.  It would show that he is trigger happy and probably had his gun out way before he claimed (bolstered by the fact that his account of accessing the gun is incredulous). 

Granted, the burden is not on the Defense, but they did not provide much and they did not address the inconsistencies in Zimmerman's accounts and inconsistencies between the evidence and Zimmerman's accounts.  They may have made it worse by having experts claim that witnesses are unreliable but then rely on certain witnesses for their expert opinion.  Commentators make too much of expert testimony.  I thought the expert testimony that State put into evidence in the Casey Anthony trial was b.s. and it seems the jury thought so too.  In this case, the defense's experts smelled of b.s. 

As did all of their witnesses.  Like I said, the burden is still with the State - but if they tie it all together in closing, like they should - they should get a conviction.