There is purportedly such a witness. However, this story is for the last seconds of the fight, not its start. We do not KNOW Martin wasn't doing what he did in self-defense.
After all, if it's legal to shoot someone is self-defense, it is surely legal to pound his head on the concrete, something which while damaging is a whole lot less likely to be lethal.
According to Zimmerman's account, the confrontation began when Martin came up to him. If it was lawful for Martin to bash Zimmerman's head against the concrete sidewalk, it was either because he was offended by seeing Zimmerman watching him (several minutes earlier) or he was offended by something Zimmerman said in their conversation.
If the confrontation began the way Zimmerman says it did, it is hard to see how Martin's actions constitute self-defense. Maybe it was self-defense in a wider sense of defending young black men from being "profiled"?
The prosecutor is relying heavily on the testimony from the girlfriend who was talking to Martin on the phone. Maybe the judge can instruct the jury to treat that testimony as reliable and treat the testimony from Zimmerman as unreliable.
“it is surely legal to pound his head on the concrete, something which while damaging is a whole lot less likely to be lethal.”
Right. . .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc_SgpyJWRY
Yup. . .much less lethal. . .so much better.
Once you have your head bashed in we all know the thug will quietly walk away. After all, we can trust him not to kill you.
You may bet your life that the thug won’t kill you once you have scrambled brains with permanent brain damage. . . I’d rather not.