Zimmerman Trial Day 4 – End-of-Day Analysis & Video of State’s Witnesses

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion:

Once again, it was simply not a very good day at all for the prosecution. The primary State witnesses today were Rachel Jeantel, Jenna Lauer, and Selma Mora. The first had her credibility substantively destroyed, the second was powerfully–almost humiliatingly–co-opted by the defense, and the third provided testimony entirely consistent with the defense’s theory of lawful self-defense. There was also some (I expect temporary) hubbub that O’Mara may have inadvertently opened the door to allow the State to introduce evidence of specific prior bad acts by George Zimmerman, and I address that in detail, as well, below.

Rachel Jeantel, State witness

With that said, let’s get to it:

Rachel Jeantel, Star “Ear”-Witness of the State

Much of the day was consumed in West’s continuing cross-examination of Rachel Jeantel, the State’s star “ear-witness.” She was purportedly on the phone with Martin up to the final moments of his confrontation with Zimmerman, and has over time come to claim an increasing amount of knowledge of the details of that confrontation.

It has become common knowledge that Jeantel has perpetrated a number of lies on this case, both under oath and otherwise, and West made certain to touch on each of these, albeit with a relatively light hand. She lied about her age–she was 18-years-old not 16-years-old at the time, she lied about why she did not attend Martin’s funeral or wake, she lied about her name to Martin’s mother and others, and so on.

For many of these lies she offered a relatively innocuous excuse–she didn’t go the funeral because she doesn’t like to see dead bodies, for example. But the sheer number and variety of them cast Jeantel as someone who was perfectly comfortable creating a fabrication if it served her convenience or purposes.

What most damaged her credibility, however, was not West’s exposure of these numerous falsehoods. Instead, West took a far more clever approach to his cross-examination of Jeantel. Many legal (and non-legal) pundits had wondered how West would walk the fine line of impeaching Jeantel’s testimony without overreaching and causing the jury to become empathetic to the poor young woman in a difficult situation not of her making.

West solved that dilemma by attacking Jeantel’s credibility not from the front, but from the flanks. It was not Jeantel who had done anything wrong, he suggested. Indeed, he praised Jeantel for her obvious sympathy for the Martin family, and especially Sabrina Fulton, Martin’s mother, and for the great care she took to avoid further aggravating Fulton’s tremendous emotional pain at the loss of her son.

#Zimmerman Trial Day 4: West: “Miss, I’m not trying to say that YOU did anything wrong.” http://t.co/ulIhPQD3Fg

— Andrew Branca, LOSD (@LawSelfDefense) June 27, 2013

In the next sentence, however, he cut the heart out of any credibility her testimony might have had. The great strength of Jeantel’s testimony was based in her claims of what she had overheard martin and Zimmerman say to each other. In earlier statements–including a letter to Fulton and a recorded phone interview with family lawyer/advisor Crump–she had said that Martin had first asked Zimmerman, “Why you following me,” to which Zimmerman had responded, she said, “What are you talking about?” Such a response is clearly not confrontational, but rather defensive, in nature, the utterance of someone who is confused by a sudden act of confrontation.

On April 2, however, Jeantel had a an interview under oath with Mr. de la Rionda, in which her story changed considerably. Here, for the first time, she recounted Zimmerman’s response as being quite aggressive, and much more in line with the State’s theory of the case that Zimmerman had “profiled,” “followed,” and murdered Martin.

Here, for the first time, Jeantel claimed that she had hear Zimmerman say not the defensive phrase, “What are you talking about?” but much more confrontational phrase, “What are you doing around here?” In this new telling, Zimmerman became for the first time in Jeantel’s testimony, aggressive and territorial, much as a high-strung dog might confront someone or something encroaching on its property.

It is important to keep in mind that up to this point the Sanford Police Department had concluded that Zimmerman’s explanation of lawful self-defense was consistent with the evidence, and that there did not exist probably cause for an arrest. It was precisely for this reason that Zimmerman had not been arrested.

Jeantel’s revised statement, however, was much more in line with what the State need to support the arrest and prosecution of ZImmerrman. Indeed, Jeantel’s newly revealed testimony formed the very backbone of the State’s affidavit of probably cause, the legal document that drove Zimmerman’s arrest and prosecution. The credibility of the newly emerged information began to degrade rapidly as West explored the circumstances in which Mr. de la Rionda had taken her statement.

Jeante’s statement was not taken by de la Rioida at the Jacksonville State Prosecutor’s office, where he had his own office worked, nor at any Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) facility, nor the Sanford Police Department, nor even Jeantel’s home, nor some other neutral location.

#Zimmerman Trial Day 4: Briliant–West describing a coercive interview by BDLR, police, crushes credibility. http://t.co/ulIhPQD3Fg

— Andrew Branca, LOSD (@LawSelfDefense) June 27, 2013

Instead, Jeantel was picked up at a friends house by a two-car caravan consisting of de la Rionda, a State prosecutor’s office investigator, Sabrina Fulton, and Crump (this last in allegedly the alternative vehicle to the car in which Jeantel was riding).

They travelled together in this way to sit in the living room of the home of Sabrina Fulton, the very home in which Trayvon Martin had lived until his mother had recently sent the troubled and troublesome youth to go live with his father.

#Zimmerman Trial Day 4: 1st Jeantel ever mentioned incriminating info was in TM’s living room, w/ TM family, lawyers http://t.co/ulIhPQD3Fg

— Andrew Branca, LOSD (@LawSelfDefense) June 27, 2013

Present for the taking of that statement was de la Rionda, of course, and one or two FDLE personnel. Also present was Crump and some other family lawyers/advisors. Martin’s father was not present in the room, but was apparently present somewhere in the home.

#Zimmerman Trial Day 4: When BDLR questioned Jeantel, TM’s mother, father, family lawyers all present. http://t.co/ulIhPQD3Fg

— Andrew Branca, LOSD (@LawSelfDefense) June 27, 2013

And, sitting directly next to Jeantel was Martin’s mother, Sabrina Fulton, with tears in her eyes. A more coercive environment for the taking of of a witnesses statement is hard to imagine.

#Zimmerman Trial Day 4: When BDLR questioned Jeantel, TM’s mother, Sabrina Fulton sitting next to her. http://t.co/ulIhPQD3Fg

— Andrew Branca, LOSD (@LawSelfDefense) June 27, 2013

Further aggravating the coercive nature of the environment was de la Rionda’s manner of questioning. It takes no allegation of misconduct to note that even during this trial de la Rionda is prone to ask leading questions, and this was his manner of questioning Jeantel is evident in the transcript and recording of that day, April 2, in the living room of Martin’s mother. This inclination would have been only accentuated by the natural difficulty he must have experienced in getting understandable responses from Jeantel. As is the nature of leading questions, the hoped for answer was built into the very question, such that Jeantel needed merely to either answer in the affirmative or layer her own imaginative onto the framework presented in the query.

Further, Wests deliberate questioning soon had Jeantel admitting without hesitation that she had molded her testimony to minimize any pain she might cause Sabrina Fulton, silently weeping beside her. In that room on that day Jeantel told not the truth and the whole truth, but a version of the truth customized to meet the perceived needs and interests of her audience.

Read more