A thought problem: If Martin had not died, would his statements have been admissible without corroboration?
Are you saying that witness cannot be a witness if he was a participant?
Wow. And to think all the trials I have seen called the participants as the main witnesses, many of whom denied any wrongdoing.
Then someone says, “Yes you did, you’re just trying to get out of trouble now.”
Then the witness can introduce the statements to the police made at the time of the incident to rebut the allegation that he is just making it up to get out of it.
If Martin was here, he may say, Zimmerman assaulted me, but would that be a self-serving statement?
____________________________________
No, I am saying that without any neutral corroboration Zimmerman's statement is self-serving and as such his statement may be ruled to be inadmissable.
And then I posted US Appeals court decision that support my statement.