Many thanks to Ada4750 for being a good sport and playing the role of devil’s advocate defending the proposition that Trayvon Martin may have provoked the fight with George Zimmerman (a) by not running all the way home to the safety of Brandy Green’s residence and (b) by confronting and assaulting Zimmerman for following him.
With Ada’s cooperation and Case 1′s unwavering analytical focus, we can now clearly see the underlying supposition for this claim; namely, Martin did not actually fear Zimmerman and chose to hide, ambush, confront and assault Zimmerman for daring to follow him.
ADA argues that Martin’s girlfriend’s (Dee Dee) testimony is absolutely critical to the outcome of the case because she is the only witness who can counter Zimmerman’s claim that Martin was the aggressor. In other words, if the jury does not believe Dee Dee’s claim that Martin told her he was afraid of the creepy man following him, it might decide Zimmerman is not guilty.
I will show why this argument is not valid and the jury does not have to believe Dee Dee to reject Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense and find him guilty of second degree murder.
In any event, her testimony will be supported by her phone records and confirmed by Zimmerman’s own statements describing Martin’s flight, disappearance from view, and import of their initial exchange of words, if not their exact words (i.e., Martin’s question why are you following me and Zimmerman’s response, why are you here?)
A. Zimmerman is on trial, not Martin
The prosecution must emphasize and the jury must never forget the central truth of this case: Trayvon Martin is not on trial; George Zimmerman is on trial because he did five things that caused Trayvon Martin’s death and then he lied to the police to cover-up what he did.
(1) He should have left his gun at home because the Neighborhood Watch Program (NWP) forbids carrying a gun;
(2) He should have remained in his vehicle because the NWP forbids running after potential suspects to prevent them from getting away before the police arrive;
(3) He should have left his gun in his vehicle and immediately returned to his vehicle after the dispatcher told him to stop following Martin, instead of continuing to follow and hunt Martin down after Martin disappeared;
(4) He should not have fired his weapon because his aggressive intentions and conduct created the situation in which he found himself;
(5) He should not have fired his weapon because we know from the evidence of his injuries and the forensic evidence at the scene that he was never reasonably in imminent danger of being killed or seriously injured, regardless of what he may have believed; and
(6) He never should have lied to the police because his lies establish his guilty state of mind just as effectively as a signed confession.
B. Martin’s character and whether he feared Zimmerman are irrelevant
It does not matter whether Tratvon Martin was the most evil and violent man who ever lived, the most meek and mild man who ever lived, or something in between. Plug-in any personality you can imagine and you still have these incontrovertible facts:
(1) Martin was unarmed;
(2) As a visitor at Brandy Green’s residence, he had a right to be where he was;
(3) His conduct was not suspicious;
(4) He had not committed a crime, was not committing a crime, and was not about to commit a crime;
(5) He attempted to avoid GZ by running away from him;
(6) GZ provoked a confrontation by getting out of his vehicle and running after him; and
(7) But for Zimmerman pursuing Martin, even after Martin disappeared from view, there never would have been a confrontation and Martin would be alive today.
Whether Martin really feared, merely feared, or did not fear Zimmerman is irrelevant. Whatever Martin may have done, Zimmerman provoked him to do it and this is true whether Martin was a psycho gangsta or a mild mannered non-violent and peaceful kid.
It would take a mighty strange concept of justice to ignore all of the incontrovertible facts and circumstances of this case and allow Zimmerman to walk away from this situation without facing consequences because Trayvon Martin did not run all the way home to Brandy Green’s residence to hide and instead had the temerity to merely ask or demand GZ to explain why he followed him.
The legal elements of self-defense and murder in the second degree do not mention the victim’s character.
The victim can be anyone, good or bad.
The victim in this case was a good kid with a bright future ahead of him, but he did not have to be. He could have been the criminal psycho gangsta George Zimmerman claimed him to be and George Zimmerman would still be guilty of murder in the second degree.
BECAUSE when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin:
(1) Zimmerman was not reasonably in fear of suffering imminent death or serious bodily injury, as shown by the evidence of his minor injuries, the forensic evidence, and his many conflicting and inconsistent statements that are equivalent to a signed confession of guilt; and
(2) the shooting was an imminently dangerous act exhibiting a depraved mind indifferent to Trayvon Martin’s life.
Special thanks to all who participated and helped shape the discussion.
Note: the word “reasonable” is italicized to emphasize the self-defense test is objective