Witnesses Back Up Zimmerman's Account Of Attack In Trayvon Martin Shooting, Police Say

Orlando Sentinel ^ | 3/26/12 8:33 p.m. EST | RENE STUTZMAN

[Clint N. Suhks]

With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked the neighborhood watch volunteer who eventually shot to death the unarmed 17-year-old, then climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times, leaving him bloody and battered, authorities told The Orlando Sentinel.

That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities said.

[Teacher317]

Does it hurt to distort things so vigorously? You think that by spouting nonsense, somehow the actual facts will get disregarded? Laughable. The young black kid was likely just another stupid thug culture devotee, and witnesses and evidence apparently support the version stated by the older gentleman. The only relevant facts to be considered, if Zimmerman’s (apparently corroborated) version is to be taken as the truth (and you have NOTHING to support any other version), are when perky little Trayvon stopped his assault, and whether Zimmerman could still feel like his life was in imminent danger at that moment. If so, then Trayvon voluntarily surrendered his right to life. If not, then Mr Zimmerman should face penalties. Everything that’s going on right now in the press and at these violence-inciting “protest rallies” are absolutely inappropriate, knee-jerk reactionism that is being used to keep certain people in the news... and possibly to distract from other news.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

The legal system in the US operates under the assumption that nobody will lie to inculpate himself in a criminal matter but that most people will lie to excuplate themselves and avoid or lessen consequences of their actions.

Which is why there are laws against giving false statements to police officers.

In some jurisdictions a self-serving statement may not be admitted in court unless there are neutral corroborating witness statements or evidence such as a security video.

Source, please?

Maybe Zimmerman's statement is truthful...I don't know, you don't know and the legal system does not consider it evidence or proof.

A statement from one of those involved is not considered evidence? Source, please?

[muawiyah]

"the next black'? You are beyond funny. That's just something you've come up with in your own mind. Zimmerman lives in one of the world's most integrated communities. There's no record of him having any prior conflict with black people ~ and in fact there are black people living there, as well as Indians, Paks, Jamaicans, etc.

The cr*p about Zimmerman going after this kid because he was 'black" or that he "wore a hoody' is NONSENSE.

[muawiyah]

Turns out Florida’s law lets even unarmed people take affirmative action if they ‘believe” there is a threat use deadly force’. Try this article out: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-17/news/os-qanda-trayvon-martin-shooting-20120317_1_law-enforcement-castle-doctrine-deadly-force or go to the statute most point to at http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html (NOTE: believe is used 13 times in this chapter, so think long and hard about “believe” and what you “believe’ believe really means)

[muawiyah]

You forgot the most important ingredient in the surfacing of the recordings ~ Martin's family had to sue the City to get them released. No one but the cops and district attorney's office had access to them earlier.

You might ask yourself why they didn't release the recordings nearly a month earlier.

Regarding "stand your own ground' law, you addressed that law as it might affect Zimmerman's claim ~ but Martin has a claim as well. He didn't provide the cops with a statement. He's dead.

[muawiyah]

The folks in Cleveland FORCED the guard on me. Otherwise I traveled and did what I wanted without guards.

Could have something to do with growing up in the most crime ridden and impoverished Zip Code in the state of Indiana.

To put it bluntly you people don't scare me at all.

[central_va]

I wonder if Reginald Denny thinks Zimmerman did the right thing?

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Since there is no known corroborating neutral witness, Zimmerman's statement is, by legal definition, self-serving. There are dozens of easily found cases wherein such statements have been deemed inadmissable.

That isn't what Rule 106 is really about, is it? Rule 106 is really about excerpting testimony which may mislead the jury.

From: UNITED STATES v. LENTZ:

Rule 106 provides that “[w]hen a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.”  Fed.R.Evid. 106.   Its purpose “is ‘to prevent a party from misleading the jury by allowing into the record relevant portions of the excluded testimony which clarify or explain the part already received.’ ” United States v. Bollin, 264 F.3d 391, 414 (4th Cir.2001) (quoting United States v. Wilkerson, 84 F.3d 692, 696 (4th Cir.1996)).

 Rule 106 does not, however, “render admissible the evidence which is otherwise inadmissible under the hearsay rules.”  Wilkerson, 84 F.3d at 696.   Nor does it require the admission of “self-serving, exculpatory statements made by a party which are being sought for admission by that same party.”  Id.;  see also Bollin, 264 F.3d at 414 (“The fact that some of the omitted testimony arguably was exculpatory does not, without more, make it admissible under the rule of completeness.”).   We review the trial court's decision to deny admissibility of evidence under Rule 106 for an abuse of discretion.   See Wilkerson, 84 F.3d at 696.

Prior to the introduction of the recordings as evidence in this case, the district court carefully and individually considered all excerpts proposed to be included or excluded by both sides, but declined to allow into evidence various self-serving exculpatory statements made by Lentz to Salvato during the conversation as well as various hearsay statements made by Salvato which were unnecessary to place Lentz's comments in perspective. Having reviewed the proposed additions and the rulings of the district court, we are satisfied that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the omitted portions as they were neither necessary to avoid misleading the jury or to place the portions admitted into proper context.

[Jeff Head]

We know that the police do have eyewitness statements that corroborate Zimerman's statement and his condition, the Police have already said that.

From the Orlando Sentinel Article:

There is about a one-minute gap during which police say they're not sure what happened.

Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.

Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police.

Zimmerman fell to the ground and Trayvon got on top of him and began slamming his head into the sidewalk, he told police.

Zimmerman began yelling for help.

Several witnesses heard those cries, and there has been a dispute about whether they came from Zimmerman or Trayvon.

Lawyers for Trayvon's family say it was Trayvon, but police say their evidence indicates it was Zimmerman.

One witness, who has since talked to local television news reporters, told police he saw Zimmerman on the ground with Trayvon on top, pounding him — and was unequivocal that it was Zimmerman who was crying for help.

Zimmerman then shot Trayvon once in the chest at very close range, according to authorities.

When police arrived less than two minutes later, Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

In a statement released by the Sanford Police Department, they indicated that the information was not released officially and anyone releasing information could be subject to displinary action up to firing, but then they said that,

"the information provided in the article is consistent with what the Sanford Police Department provided to the State Attorney's office."

[Paved Paradise]

As more and more information comes out on little Trayvon, the picture becomes clearer. I pray for Zimmerman’s safety right now.

[muawiyah]

Elsewhere someone noted that Zimmerman called the cops on something other than a 911 number.

That was explained as not a problem because the calls to that line as well as the 911 calls went to the same dispatch center.

So, a question, was the GPS locator invoked when that call went through the other number?

[Silentgypsy]

You need to get a grip. Who are “you people?” I’m a little old lady. Anyone who’s scared of me definitely needs his/her bolts tightened.

I just hope that what you write doesn’t convince some naive person that they can don their cloak of invisibility and cruise those mean streets.

P.S. I sidestepped the guards. All they ever did was grouse about it.

[wtc911]

Am I satisfied with the veracity of Zimmerman's statement?

Absent the release of corroborating statements or evidence such as CCTV recordings....no.

I do not take any self-serving statements as being automatically truthful.

[kabar]

Zimmerman's statement is not evidence or proof because it is self-exculpatory and not supported by neutral third-party statements or proof such as a CCTV tape.

How many times must you be reminded that Zimmerman doesn't have to prove himself innocent. The state must prove him guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. There is plenty of physical evidence and witness testimony to corroborate Zimmerman's version of events.

[wtc911]

There is plenty of physical evidence and witness testimony to corroborate Zimmerman's version of events.

_____________________________

How many times are you going to ignore a request that you provide links to any document, tape or transcript from a reliable source (read LEO) that shows evidence or witness testimony that Martin attacked Zimmerman?

You keep refering to these witness statements...how hard could it be to provide a link to one?

[mac_truck]

No one cares whether the self righteous there's a racist under my bed crowd is satisfied or not.

They never are.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Absent the release of corroborating statements or evidence such as CCTV recordings....no.

There are corroborating statements.

I do not take any self-serving statements as being automatically truthful.

Fair enough. What picture does the physical evidence paint?

Absent the gunshot wound to his chest, what other injuries did Martin suffer?

[wtc911]

All of that is old ground. A number of freepers have repeatedly stated that witness statements support Zimmerman's assertion that Martin attacked him. I am waiting for anybody to provide a link to any such witness statement.

FWIW...WABC news just reported that the homicide detective who interviewed Zimmerman didn't buy his story and wanted to charge him but the county prosecutors said that they didn't feel that they could convict on the evidence.

As I said earlier...I don't think that he will ever be charged...precisely because there are no witnesses to the start of the fight.

There may be a civil suit but who knows how that would go...

[kabar]

You might ask yourself why they didn't release the recordings nearly a month earlier.

I am flabbergasted you would ask such a question given the statement of the Sanford City Manager on the case:

"The Sanford Police Department has conducted a complete and fair investigation of this incident. We have provided the results of our investigation to the Office of the State Attorney for their review and consideration for possible criminal prosecution."

The case was and is still under investigation. Releasing the tapes would appear to complicate such an investigation. You don't want to release such information until you have had a chance to interview everyone you can. I am concerned that the substance of the girl friend's reported conversation with Martin could have been influenced by the release of the tapes. Her conversation was not recorded.

Regarding "stand your own ground' law, you addressed that law as it might affect Zimmerman's claim ~ but Martin has a claim as well. He didn't provide the cops with a statement. He's dead.

It was really a case of self-defense not "stand your ground." Zimmerman was on his back with his head being slammed against the pavement. Somehow, the weapon went off. Zimmerman's media advisor, Joe Oliver, suggested in an interview that there could have been an accidental discharge of the weapon. If you want to create a scenario, when Martin was on top of Zimmerman, he discovered the weapon in Zimmerman's waistband and tried to grab it, which is why Zimmerman was screaming for help. During the scuffle over the weapon, it went off.

I am sure that the forensic information will give us a better indication of what happened including who shot the weapon and how close to Martin was the muzzle. We can engage in all the speculation we want, but we don't have the facts that the police do. And they determined that the physical evidence and witness testimony supported Zimmerman's version of events.

Zimmerman could be the one dead today, not Martin. I wonder whether Martin's version of events would prove that he acted in self-defense. I am sure Al Sharpton, Farrakahn, Jackson, Obama, Spike Lee, et. al., would be defending this poor black boy. Would you be defending Zimmerman?

[kabar]

From the city manager's statement:

Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?

When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in bad faith, the officer and the City may be held liable.

According to Florida Statute 776.032 : 776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

Why weren’t the 911 tapes initially released?

There are exemptions to the public records laws for active criminal intelligence and for ongoing investigations. In this instance, the 911 calls made by neighbors in the subdivision, and the non- emergency call made by Mr. Zimmerman are all key to the investigation by Sanford Police Department. In consultation with the Office of the State Attorney, the Sanford police department had decided not to release the audio recordings of the 911 calls due to the ongoing investigation. Many times, specific information is contained in those recordings which is vital to the integrity of the investigation. At the time, it was determined that if revealed, the information may compromise the integrity of the investigation prior to its completion. The 911 tapes have since been released.