George Zimmerman - Defendant’s Rights and the Media

On Thursday, June 14, The Daily Breeze (a newspaper here in Southern California) reported that a judge in Orlando, Florida, had ruled that statements made by George Zimmerman to police detectives after he fatally shot Trayvon Martin can be released to the public.  The judge further ruled that the identities of witnesses who had not been identified yet, can stay private.  The article went on to state that both the prosecutors and Zimmerman’s defense attorney had wanted to keep both Zimmerman’s statement and the witnesses identities private.

Additionally, according to the article, the judge said disclosing Zimmerman’s statements to police detectives would not jeopardize his ability to get a fair trial.  Further, the judge ruled that tests given to Zimmerman after the shooting could be released, as well as some crime scene photos and Zimmerman’s recorded telephone calls from jail.

Where do I begin?  The United States Constitution guarantees the accused the right to, among other things, a fair and impartial jury.  This judge’s ruling allows key elements to the case, including Zimmerman’s statement to police, crime scene photographs, and Zimmerman’s recorded telephone calls from jail to be released to the press.  Among other things, this allows the potential jury pool that will sit in judgment of Zimmerman to view  key evidence of the case before it can be argued in court.  Potentially this information can be splashed all over newspapers and be argued by so-called experts on TV talk shows again before a trial even begins.

I note also that the article stated that both the prosecution and the defense attorneys argued against the release of this information.  Ironic that both opposing counsels argued against it but the judge ruled in favor of the news media who wants to have it.  Is it just me that thinks this ruling says that the rights of the news media trumps those of the defendant who is on trial. 

At least the judge ruled against releasing the identities of the witnesses in the case who have not yet been identified.  Can you imagine the circus that would have ensued if he hadn’t?  You would have had news agencies parked out in front of their houses and knocking on their homes or workplaces just to get an exclusive interview.

I am not arguing the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman here.  That should be done in a court of law with all the evidence presented before a jury of his peers.  What I am saying is that this latest ruling by a Circuit Court judge in Florida troubles me greatly in regards to Mr. Zimmerman chances of getting a fair and impartial jury.

THE TRAYVON MARTIN CASE

Here are my thoughts on the Trayvon Martin case.  This is a case where emotions are running very high, both in the city of Sanford, FL where it happened, and on the national scene.  Political pundits and arm chair experts are constantly commenting on every news leak or story that comes out.  From an outsider investigator’s perspective, here’s what is known.  We have a young 17 year old boy (Trayvon Martin) who is dead from a gunshot wound.  We have a Neighborhood Watch volunteer (George Zimmerman) who claimed he shot him in self-defense.  We have a taped conversation between the shooter and a police dispatcher.  Other than that, it’s mostly conjecture and relaying on news leaks.

Here’s what I think will be important to the case from an investigative standpoint.  If the police did their job, they would have canvassed the neighborhood for witnesses to the shooting.  They would be looking for anyone who saw anything before the shooting, the actual shooting itself, and immediately after the shooting.  The police probably canvassed the area on more than one occasion.  Any eyewitness interviews to the events should have been videoed and tape recorded.  This would go a long way in dispelling any claims of police coercion and also be of assistance if any witnesses subsequently change their story. 

If Zimmerman was knocked to the ground and was subsequently being struck by Martin as some reports are saying, they would be looking for physical evidence of it.  Zimmerman’s clothing would be examined for any evidence of grass stains, dirt or other residue consistent to the ground area where the shooting happened.  Just as important is if there was any evidence of this on his clothing?  Was it on his back, his side etc. 

The press has reported that Zimmerman claimed he was struck in the nose and face and also hit the back of his head when he fell.  If so, they would interview any paramedics that treated him at the scene.  Were there any signs of injury? Photographs should have been taken to show whether there was or wasn’t any injuries that would have been conducive to these claims.  It is important to note that often times swelling and discoloration doesn’t reach its peak until a day or two after an injury.  Subsequent follow-up photos should have been taken.  

One critical piece of this investigation would have been discovered at the autopsy.  What was the trajectory of the bullet when it was fired at the victim? Does it match up with the events as described by the shooter? Was it on an upward trajectory that was conducive with the shooter lying on his back and firing upward or was it at a different angle.  This would be a critical piece of evidence.