ABC News has released a new photo of the back of George Zimmerman’s head, taken just “three minutes after he shot and killed Trayvon Martin.” His head is brutally bloodied. As the image above shows, there’s blood all over his head, at least two gashes, and a large bruise forming at the top of his head.
Zimmerman’s contention all along has been that Martin was bashing his head against the pavement, which is why he was forced to shoot him. The media – especially ABC News -- initially attempted to discount that story completely, releasing video of his booking at the Sanford police station that were not well-pixellated, and thus did not show the gashes on the back of his head.
It took several days for ABC News to release an enhanced version of the video that showed that there were gashes on Zimmerman’s head. In the meantime, the media had a field day reporting that Zimmerman had shot Martin essentially in cold blood; Martin’s family claimed that Zimmerman was not injured; members of Congress, without any evidence, attempted to pass a resolution labeling the killing a racially-motivated crime.
ABC News reports that the source of the new photo was a witness to the aftermath of the event, and that Zimmerman asked the source to call his wife for him after the shooting.
I like that asinine statement from attorney Benjamin Crump: "How bad could it have been if they didn't take him to the hospital and didn't stitch him up?"Martin’s family attorney, Benjamin Crump, suggested that the photo didn’t mean anything because Zimmerman wasn’t brought to a hospital for stitches. “How bad could it have been if they didn’t take him to the hospital [and] didn’t stitch him up,” he asked. But that statement, of course, if Zimmerman’s head was being bashed against the ground, he had no legal obligation to wait until his injuries required immediate hospital attention.
PROSECUTION IS NOT ONLY IMMORAL, BUT STUPID
With ABC News’ release of the George Zimmerman photo showing blood flowing freely from his head, the question becomes whether Angela Corey, the prosecutor in the case, had access to the photo before charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder.
The arrest affidavit did not mention the photograph, or the bleeding, gashes, and bruises on Zimmermans’ head. Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated upon release of the arrest affidavit that it was “so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge … everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense.”
After the release of the photo, however, Dershowitz went much further, telling Breitbart News that if the prosecutors did have the photo and didn’t mention it in the affidavit, that would constitute a “grave ethical violation,” since affidavits are supposed to contain “all relevant information.”
Dershowitz continued, “An affidavit that willfully misstates undisputed evidence known to the prosecution is not only unethical but borders on perjury because an affiant swears to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and suppressing an important part of the whole truth is a lie."
When asked if it made a difference whether the prosecution had the bloody photograph at the time they charged Zimmerman, Dershowitz responded, “We do know that there were earlier photographs before the affidavit was done that strongly suggested blood on the back of the head, and we know the police had first access to him, so if there was blood they [the prosecution] would know about it …
"I've had cases in Florida against prosecutors,” Dershowitz said, “and this is not the first time they have willfully omitted exculpatory evidence. It's a continuing problem. Here, it’s not only immoral, but stupid. The whole country is watching. What do they benefit from having half-truths in an affidavit?"
That means it's cut-and-dried self-defense. Zimmerman walks. Probably no trial.Dershowitz added, "I'm not taking sides, but I'm insisting that both sides play by the rules, and so far the prosecution is not playing by the rules."