In order to prove Zimmerman committed murder (or manslaughter), one has to prove he did not fire in self-defense. In order to prove he did not fire in self-defense, one has to prove that it was Trayvon Martin screaming for help and not Zimmerman.
Which, of course, is why team Crump pushed the “scared, innocent, wide-eyed little boy running his little legs off trying to escape” from the “aggressive racist chasing him down intent on executing this “coon” like a rabid dog.”
Then we found out Martin was not a little boy. We found out he was not wide-eyed and innocent. Then came Zimmerman’s injuries- and Martin’s lack there of.
The evidence- from the prosecution- has shown that Zimmerman (despite a push and a retaliatory slap) is not particularly aggressive. In fact, he has overwhelmingly been described as a calm, even-keel guy. Even the person he slapped said he would be the last person she thought would ever be involved in something like this. That’s the worst the prosecution has found- and it was surrounded by a mountain of positive statements otherwise.
The evidence- from the prosecution- has shown that Zimmerman (despite off-hand comments expressing annoyance at Mexicans) is anything but a racist. Even the single person they did find- who made exaggerated claims about Zimmerman and his entire family- could not mention a single racist thing he had ever done or said. Of course, this extremely weak evidence that he’s a racist is surrounded by a mountain of evidence that he was not.
Other than parts of Dee Dee’s testimony, there is no evidence that indicates he was scared of Zimmerman, or that Zimmerman was “stalking” him. Other parts of Dee Dee’s testimony indicate that he was not scared- and the timeline and location of events also demonstrate he was not fleeing. Not to mention at least one witness that showed him on top of Zimmerman.
In short, team Crump’s original narrative has, by and large, fallen apart. (though there are still thousands if not millions of people who still believe every last word of it.)
I think it’s funny that people point their fingers at Zimmerman’s lack of credibility, rightly so to a degree, and in a sense, due to the bond hearing. Yet, it is Zimmerman’s persecutors that have taken, by far, the biggest hits to their credibility. Their narrative of what happened was an enormous pile of fecal matter- filled to the brim with lies and distortions- and it has only been revised when it absolutely has had to be.
So you can point to Zimmerman and say that he hasn’t been forthright with the truth, is hiding something, or has diminished credibility. But when it comes to his account of events that night, his account of events has held up much better- and to a much higher level of scrutiny than his persecutor’s (who have had to answer to no one for their dishonesty).
