Sorry if this has been covered already. I was listening to the FDLE interview with W6 ("John") and found yet another one of Zimmerman's key claims corroborated. If you remember during the bond hearing, de la Rionda was questioning Det. Gilbreath on some of Zimmerman's statements. Gilbreath cited Zimmerman's claim that, directly before the fatal shot, they were first struggling on then the grass then moved to the sidewalk area. Gilbreath claimed that the narrative was not supported by witness statements or physical evidence. During the
John's statement with FDLE (26:20), he cleared this matter up:
W6 went on to describe what he described as Martin either hitting or forcefully holding Zimmerman and waxed curious as to why Martin did not get up after he told them to cut it out, instead continuing the attack.
Thanks for putting that up. That pretty much closes down one of the two main lines of attack made by prosecution at the bond hearing. I went back and watched the tape of the hearing that had no commercial interruptions, and found the other one, which was initially volunteered by Gilbreath without being asked about it:
O'MARA: Any evidence that conflicts any eyewitnesses, anything that conflicts with the contention that Mr. Martin assaulted first?
GILBREATH: That contention that was given to us by him, other than filling in the figures being one following or chasing the other one, as to who threw the first blow, no.
During a commercial break, this exchange occurred: (I transcribed this so any errors are mine.)
de la Rionda - Mr. Zimmerman never claimed that he chased - in terms of ran after - Mr. Martin, is that correct?
Gilbreath - No.
de la Rionda - But, you still have, is it not true, a witness who describes someone chasing another person from the area where they ended up. In other words, from the area where Mr. Martin lived, to the area where the murder happened.
Gilbreath - Yes.
I think in the first answer Gilbreath really meant "yes" and was just confused.
Anyway, Witness two now says she only saw one person if indeterminate race, gender, or age. From the Orlando Sentinel:
Witness 2
A young woman who lives in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community, where Trayvon was shot, was interviewed twice by Sanford police and once by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
She told authorities that she had taken out her contact lenses just before the incident. In her first recorded interview with Sanford police four days after the shooting, she told lead Investigator Chris Serino, "I saw two guys running. Couldn't tell you who was in front, who was behind."
She stepped away from her window, and when she looked again, she "saw a fistfight. Just fists. I don't know who was hitting who."
A week later, she added a detail when talking again to Serino: During the chase, the two figures had been 10 feet apart.
That all changed when she was reinterviewed March 20 by an FDLE agent. That time, she recalled catching a glimpse of just one running figure, she told FDLE Investigator John Batchelor, and she heard the person more than saw him.
"I couldn't tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white. I couldn't tell you because it was dark and because I didn't have my contacts on or glasses. … I just know I saw a person out there."
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...120522_1_witnesses-change-shooting-fdle-agent
So, the witnesses have changed or clarified their statements to negate the evidence of Zimmerman's guilt hinted at by the prosecution at the bond hearing. One witness says the fight did move to the sidewalk, and another now says she saw no chase.
Also, with regard to the gunshot, Gilbreath described the powder burns on Martin's sweatshirt as "near contact" and the stippling as "close proximity".
