Mark O’Mara, George Zimmerman’s defense attorney, talks to reporters. (Photo by Werth Media.)
By Ashley Lopez
Florida Center for Investigative Reporting
George Zimmerman’s defense team rested its case Wednesday.
Florida prosecutors have said Zimmerman profiled, followed and confronted Martin.
After a few days of testimony, Zimmerman’s defense ended its presentation to the jury in half the time the prosecution took to make its case.
According to The Los Angeles Times:
Zimmerman, 29, chose Wednesday not to take the stand in the proceedings, which began with jury selection a month ago. Zimmerman has given several versions of the events of the night of Feb. 26, 2012, when he and Martin had their confrontation in Sanford, and would have been a ripe target for a vigorous cross-examination.
Closing arguments in the case, which galvanized civil rights leaders across the nation, could come as soon as Thursday. Judge Debra S. Nelson will then instruct the six-woman jury before it begins deliberating.
The defense took less than four full days to present its case, which included fewer than 20 witnesses, some of whom also testified for the prosecution. The prosecution, which has the burden of proving that Zimmerman committed second-degree murder as charged, called about three dozen witnesses and took nine days to present its case.
After Nelson earlier Wednesday ruled against two defense motions requesting that an animated reconstruction be admitted into evidence along with texts from a cellphone, most of the rest of Wednesday was taken up by the testimony of Dennis Root, a safety consultant.
The prosecution’s main job throughout the trial was to prove that Zimmerman’s life was not threatened when he killed Martin.
Zimmerman’s defense attorneys have maintained Martin was stronger than Zimmerman and was a threat to him in the moments leading up to the shooting.
According to reporters and observers of the trial, that claim has been hard to prove either way, which makes it likely Zimmerman will walk.
While the trial’s not over yet, many observers have already made up their minds: Zimmerman will be found not guilty. Last weekend Washington Postwriter Gene Weingarten tweeted, “I don’t like George Zimmerman, & he caused this to happen, but from what I’ve read he will, and should, walk.” ABC analyst Dan Abrams wrote, “I just don’t see how a jury convicts [Zimmerman] of second degree murder or even manslaughter in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.” The Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel predicted that “unless the prosecution rallies, don’t be shocked if Zimmerman walks away totally free.”
I think they’re right. Over the past two weeks, trial-watchers have seen a lot of things: bad jokes, anguish, rage, odd disparagement of Zimmerman’s physical capabilities. But there’s one thing we haven’t seen: a compelling, factual rebuttal to Zimmerman’s account of what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed.
Here is what we know: Trayvon Martin died in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26, 2012. If George Zimmerman hadn’t been there, Martin would still be alive. Zimmerman found Martin suspicious. He called 911. A confrontation ensued. Beyond that, the facts are unclear. There’s not much physical evidence in the case. Other than the defendant, there are no eyewitnesses. Zimmerman claims that he was attacked by Martin, and that he shot him because he felt he was at risk of great bodily harm. We can certainly speculate as to whether or not he’s telling the truth, but can we say for sure? Zimmerman’s the only one who was there, and none of the prosecution’s witnesses came close to conclusively refuting his story.
There have also been reports that the prosecution’s case has met met a few pitfalls along the way.
From Business Insider:
One of [the defense’s] witnesses was Jonathon Good, a neighbor of Zimmerman’s who watched his fight with Martin through his blinds on a rainy night in February 2012. Despite being called by the prosecution, Good told the court that Zimmerman was on the bottom of the “tussle” with Martin.
Even more damning for the prosecution, Goode said he believed Zimmerman was the one yelling for help. Both of these observations would back up Zimmerman’s belief that his life was in danger.
The other problematic witness for the state was Martin’s friend Rachel Jeantel, who was on the phone with him right before he died and was supposed to be the prosecution’s star witness. Zimmerman’s lawyers found a number of inconsistencies in her story, potentially damaging her credibility and helping his case.
The New York Times reports that one of the prosecution’s most significant mistakes was that they “overreached” when bringing charges against Zimmerman.
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.
Zimmerman was at first not going to stand trial because of the state’s broad self-defense law, known as “Stand Your Ground.” When news spread that Zimmerman was not facing criminal charges after shooting an unarmed minor, rallies all over the country took place and state officials were forced to take action.
In light of the public outrage and scrutiny, city and law enforcement officials in the state “have taken precautionary steps for the possibility of mass protests or even civil unrest if George Zimmerman is acquitted,” the Associated Press reports.