This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)

In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which mens rea (Latin for "guilty mind") does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the actus reus (Latin for "guilty act") although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offence. The liability is said to be strict because defendants will be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of mens rea.

Strict liability laws were created in the 19th century to improve working and safety standards in factories. Needing to prove mens reas on the part of the factory owners was very difficult and resulted in very few prosecutions. The creation of strict liability offences meant that convictions were increased. Common strict liability offences today include the selling of alcohol to underage persons.

These laws are applied either in regulatory offences enforcing social behaviour where minimal stigma attaches to a person upon conviction, or where society is concerned with the prevention of harm, and wishes to maximise the deterrent value of the offence. The imposition of strict liability may operate very unfairly in individual cases. For example, in Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Storkwain (1986) 2 ALL ER 635, a pharmacist supplied drugs to a patient who presented a forged doctor's prescription, but was convicted even though the House of Lords accepted that the pharmacist was blameless. The justification is that the misuse of drugs is a grave social evil and pharmacists should be encouraged to take even unreasonable care to verify prescriptions before supplying drugs. Similarly, where liability is imputed or attributed to another through vicarious liability or corporate liability, the effect of that imputation may be strict liability albeit that, in some cases, the accused will have a mens rea imputed and so, in theory, will be as culpable as the actual wrongdoer.

Discussion of English law[link]

Under the common law the rule is that crimes require proof of mens rea except in cases of public nuisance, criminal and blasphemous libel, and criminal contempt of court. Where the liability arises under a statute, there has been considerable inconsistency, with different rules of construction in statutory interpretation producing varying assessments of the will of Parliament. But, in Sweet v Parsley [1970] AC 132, Lord Reid laid down the following guidelines for all cases where the offence is criminal as opposed to quasi-criminal:

1. Wherever a section is silent as to mens rea there is a presumption that, in order to give effect to the will of Parliament, words importing mens rea must be read into the provision.
2. It is a universal principle that if a penal provision is reasonably capable of two interpretations, that interpretation which is most favourable to the accused must be adopted.
3. The fact that other sections of the Act expressly require mens rea is not in itself sufficient to justify a decision that a section which is silent as to mens rea creates an absolute offence. It is necessary to go outside the Act and examine all relevant circumstances in order to establish that this must have been the intention of Parliament.^[1]

Hence, the literal rule is qualified, and there is a rebuttable presumption that Parliament intended a mens rea to be a requirement in any section which creates an offence where the social stigma following conviction and the punishment available to be imposed show this to be a truly criminal offence. In Gammon v AG for Hong Kong (1985) AC 1, Lord Scarman rebutted the presumption because public safety was threatened. Hence, statutes involving pollution, dangerous drugs, and acting as a director while disqualified have been interpreted as imposing strict liability. In Environment Agency (formerly National Rivers Authority) v. Empress Car Co. (Abertillery) Ltd. (1998) 2 WLR. 350, examples are given of cases in which strict liability has been imposed for "causing" events which were the immediate consequence of the deliberate acts of third parties but which the defendant had a duty to prevent or take reasonable care to prevent. If words like "knowingly" or "wilfully" appear in the section, the inference is that Parliament intended a mens rea requirement in that section. But, if words implying a mens rea are present in some sections but not others, this suggests that Parliament deliberately excluded a mens rea requirement in those sections which are silent.

In considering offences created in the Children Act 1960, Lord Hutton in B (a minor) v DPP (2000) 1 AER 833, states the current position at p855:

the test is not whether it is a reasonable implication that the statute rules out mens rea as a constituent part of the crime – the test is whether it is a necessary implication.

As to the meaning of "necessary implication", Lord Nicholls said

Necessary implication connotes an implication that is compellingly clear. Such an implication can be found in the language used, the nature of the offence, the mischief sought to be prevented and any other circumstances which may assist in determining what intention is properly to be attributed to Parliament when creating the offence. Necessary implication may arise from not only the statutory provision under review but also from the rules governing that provision to be deduced from other provisions.

Thus, the court must examine the overall purpose of the statute. If the intention is to introduce quasi-criminal offences, strict liability will be acceptable to give quick penalties to encourage future compliance, e.g. fixed-penalty parking offences. But, if the policy issues involved are sufficiently significant and the punishments more severe, the test must be whether reading in a mens rea requirement will defeat Parliament's intention in creating the particular offence, i.e. if defendants might escape liability too easily by pleading ignorance, this would not address the "mischief" that Parliament was attempting to remedy.

Sexual Offences Act 2003[link]

In a 2005 case, a 15 year old boy was convicted of statutory rape of a child under 13, a crime under Section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The prosecution accepted the boy's claim that he had believed the 12-year-old girl to be 15, but he was nevertheless sentenced to 12 months detention. This was reduced on appeal to a conditional discharge, but, in a 3-2 decision, the House of Lords declined to reverse the conviction.^[2]

United States[link]

As a jurisdiction with due process, the United States usually applies strict liability to only the most minor crimes or infractions. One example would be parking violations, where the state only needs to show that the defendant's vehicle was parked inappropriately at a certain curb. But serious crimes like rape and murder require some showing of culpability or mens rea. Otherwise, every accidental death, even during medical treatment in good faith, could become grounds for a murder prosecution and a prison sentence.

A serious offense in which strict liability tends to show up is in drunk driving laws; the punishment tends to be given on a strict liability basis, with no mens rea requirement at all. This was important for the purposes of a U.S. Supreme Court case in 2004, Leocal v. Ashcroft, where a deportation order was overturned because the conviction that led to the deportation order was a strict liability law, while deportation was only allowed upon conviction if the crime was a "crime of violence" (where violence, or the potential for it, was inherent in the crime itself).

In many states, statutory rape is considered a strict liability offense. In these states, 22 as of 2007, it is possible to face felony charges despite not knowing the age of the other person, or even if the minor presented identification showing an age of eighteen or higher. Frequently, this applies to all sex offenses.^{[citation needed]}

The American Law Institute's Model Penal Code establishes strict liability only for violations, and for statutory rape of a girl under the age of ten.^{[citation needed]}

Australia[link]

The Australian Criminal Code Act of 1995^[3] defines strict liability and absolute liability in division 6.

Recent occupational health and safety legislation creates strict liability for OHS offences. Also, certain other industrial offences such as pollution tend to be enacted in terms of strict liability. Most air safety regulations in regards to operators of aircraft and un-manned rockets are enacted as strict liability offences.^{[citation needed]}

Canada[link]

Since 1978, Canadian criminal law has recognized a distinction between offences of "strict" and "absolute" liability. In R. v. City of Sault Ste-Marie the Supreme Court of Canada created a two-tiered system of liability for regulatory offences. Under this system, the Crown would continue to be relieved from proving the mens rea of the offence. However, offences of strict liability would grant the accused a defence of due diligence – which would continue to be denied in cases of absolute liability. Further, in the absence of a clear legislative intent to the contrary, the Court held that all regulatory offences would be presumed to bear strict liability.

Following the enactment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, this distinction was upheld in Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act. The Supreme Court further held that the inclusion of the possibility of imprisonment − no matter how remote − in an offence of absolute liability violated the accused's Section 7 right to liberty.

Germany[link]

In Germany Criminal Strict liabillity does not exist today, since it is not consistent with the "nulla poena sine culpa" principle (no punishment without guilt).^[4]

Still, there was Criminal Strict liability in the German Reich, i.e. § 18 Wechselstempelgesetz, § 95 Reichsstempelgesetz.^[5]

See also[link]

• Command responsibility
• Criminal law
• Espionage Act of 1917
• Local law

Notes[link]

References[link]

• Allen, Michael. (2005). Textbook on Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-927918-7.
• Carpenter, (2003). "On Statutory Rape, Strict Liability, and the Public Welfare Offense Model". American Law Review. Vol. 53, 313.
• Carson, W. G. (1970). "Some Sociological Aspects of Strict Liability and the Enforcement of Factory Legislation". Modern Law Review Vol. 33, 396.
• Glazebrook, P. R. (2001). "How old did you think she was?" Camb. Law Journal 26.
• New South Wales Parliament (2006). Strict and Absolute Liability (Discussion Paper) [1]
• Ormerod, David. (2005). Smith and Hogan Criminal Law. London: LexisNexis. ISBN 0-406-97730-5.
• Simons, (1997). "When Is Strict Criminal Liability Just?" Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology. Vol. 87, 1075.

v t e English criminal law Part of the common law series Classes of crimes Common law Indictable Either way Summary Regulatory Lesser included Elements of crimes Actus reus Causation Mens rea Intention (criminal law) Intention in English law Recklessness Criminal negligence Corporate / Vicarious / Strict liability Omissions Concurrence Ignorantia juris non excusat Inchoate offences Encouraging or assisting crime Conspiracy Accessory Attempt Common purpose Defences Self-defence Duress Necessity Marital coercion Consent Insanity Diminished responsibility Intoxication Category:Criminal defences Offences against the person Homicide (Murder / Manslaughter / Corporate manslaughter / Infanticide) Child destruction Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm Assault occasioning actual bodily harm Common assault Battery Kidnapping False imprisonment Harassment Offences against the Person Act 1861 Sexual offences Rape Sexual assault Sexual Offences Act 2003 Public order offences Riot Violent disorder Affray Fear or provocation of violence Intentional harassment, alarm or distress Harassment, alarm or distress Public Order Act 1986 Nuisance Public nuisance Offences against property Dishonesty Burglary Robbery Theft Taken Without Owner's Consent (TWOC) Deception Handling stolen goods Blackmail Computer crime Theft Act 1968 Theft Act 1978 Fraud Act 2006 Criminal damage Conspiracy to defraud Forgery, personation and cheating Forgery Cheating the public revenue Offences against justice Bribery Perjury Perverting the course of justice Other common law areas Contract Tort Property Wills Trusts and estates Evidence See also Criminal procedure History Law of England and Wales portal Criminal justice portal

In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. A rule specifying strict liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his or her acts and omissions regardless of culpability (including fault in criminal law terms, typically the presence of mens rea). Strict liability is prominent in tort law (especially product liability), corporations law, and criminal law. For analysis of the pros and cons of strict liability as applied to product liability, the most important strict liability regime, see product liability.

Tort law[link]

In tort law, strict liability is the imposition of liability on a party without a finding of fault (such as negligence or tortious intent). The claimant need only prove that the tort occurred and that the defendant was responsible. The law imputes strict liability to situations it considers to be inherently dangerous.^[1] It discourages reckless behavior and needless loss by forcing potential defendants to take every possible precaution. It also has the effect of simplifying and thereby expediting court decisions in these cases.

A classic example of strict liability is the owner of a tiger rehabilitation center. No matter how strong the tiger cages are, if an animal escapes and causes damage and injury, the owner is held liable. Another example is a contractor hiring a demolition subcontractor that lacks proper insurance. If the subcontractor makes a mistake, the contractor is strictly liable for any damage that occurs.

In strict liability situations, although the plaintiff does not have to prove fault, the defendant can raise a defense of absence of fault, especially in cases of product liability, where the defense may argue that the defect was the result of the plaintiff's actions and not of the product, that is, no inference of defect should be drawn solely because an accident occurs.^[2] If the plaintiff can prove that the defendant knew about the defect before the damages occurred, additional punitive damages can be awarded to the victim.

The doctrine's most famous advocates were Learned Hand, Benjamin Cardozo, and Roger J. Traynor.

Under English and Welsh law, in cases where tortious liability is strict, the defendant will often be liable only for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of his or her act or omission (as in nuisance).

Strict liability is sometimes distinguished from absolute liability. In this context, an actus reus may be excused from strict liability if due diligence is proved. Absolute liability, however, requires only an actus reus.

Criminal law[link]

The concept of strict liability is also found in criminal law, though the same or similar concept may appear in contexts where the term itself is not used. Strict liability often applies to vehicular traffic offenses. In a speeding case, for example, whether the defendant knew that the posted speed limit was being exceeded is irrelevant. The prosecutor would need to prove only that the defendant was operating the vehicle in excess of the speed limit.

Strict liability can be determined by looking at the intent of the legislature. If the legislature seems to have purposefully left out a mental state element (mens rea) because they felt mental state need not be proven, it is treated as a strict liability. However, when a statute is silent as to the mental state (mens rea) and it is not clear that the legislature purposely left it out, the ordinary presumption is that a mental state is required for criminal liability. When no mens rea is specified, under the Model Penal Code or MPC, the default mens rea requirement is recklessness, which the MPC defines as "when a person consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk with respect to a material element".^[3]

Strict liability laws can also prevent defendants from raising diminished mental capacity defenses, since intent does not need to be proven.^[4]

See also[link]

• Command responsibility
• Due diligence
• Public liability
• Restatement of Torts, Second
• Vicarious liability

References[link]

The fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, United States. Trayvon Martin was a 17-year-old African American male who was unarmed.^[2] George Zimmerman was a 28-year-old multi-racial Hispanic American,^{[3][Note 1]} who was the community watch coordinator for the gated community where the shooting took place.^{[5][6][7][8][9]}

While on a private errand, Zimmerman saw Martin walking inside the gated community where Martin and his father were visiting his father's fiancée. Zimmerman called the Sanford Police Department to report Martin's behavior as suspicious.^[10] Shortly afterwards, there was an altercation, which ended with Zimmerman fatally shooting Martin once in the chest at close range.^{[11][12][13][14][15]}

When police arrived on the scene Zimmerman told them that Martin had attacked him and that he had shot Martin in self-defense.^[2][16] Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and two vertical lacerations on the back of his head.^[17][18] EMTs treated Zimmerman at the scene, after which he was taken to the Sanford Police Department. Zimmerman was detained and questioned for approximately five hours.^[19][18] A statement was videotaped, and he was then released without being charged.^[17] Police said that they had not found evidence to contradict his assertion of self-defense.^{[20][21][22][23][24]}

The circumstances of Martin's death, the initial decision not to charge Zimmerman, and questions about Florida's Stand Your Ground law received national and international attention. Allegations of racist motivation for the shooting and police conduct contributed to public demands for Zimmerman's arrest.^[25][26][27] A Special Prosecutor was appointed to take over the investigation and on April 11, 2012, she chose to file charges of murder in the second degree against Zimmerman.^[28][29] Zimmerman then turned himself in and was placed in custody.^[30][31] On April 20, the judge approved Zimmerman's bail on a $150,000 bond.^[32] He was released from jail on April 23 and is required to wear an electronic monitoring device until trial.

People involved in the case[link]

George Zimmerman

Trayvon Martin[link]

Trayvon ( /treɪˈvɔːn/ tray-VAWN) Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, who were divorced in 1999.^[33] The autopsy report stated he was 5 feet 11 inches and 158 pounds.^[34]

He was a high school junior in the Miami, Florida, area and had recently turned 17.^[35][36] Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had been taken by his father to Sanford, Florida, following a ten-day suspension from high school.^{[37][38] [39]} They were visiting his father's fiancée and her son at her townhome in The Retreat at Twin Lakes in Sanford on the day Martin was fatally shot.^[40]

George Zimmerman[link]

George Michael Zimmerman^[41] was born on October 5, 1983, in Manassas, Virginia,^[42] and is the son of Robert Zimmerman, Sr., a retired Virginia magistrate,^[43] and Peruvian-born Gladys (née Mesa) Zimmerman.^[5][8] He grew up in what his father has described as a "multiracial family" (one of his maternal great-grandfathers was of Afro-Peruvian background),^[44] and was raised in his mother's Catholic religion (his father was Baptist).^[4] Zimmerman's voter registration record lists him as Hispanic and a Democrat.^[45][46]

Zimmerman's height is shown as 5'8" and his weight as 185 pounds on his Seminole County Sheriff's Office Inmate Booking Information dated 4/11/2012.^[47] Zimmerman's height is shown as 5'7" and his weight at 200 pounds on the Sanford Police Department Offense Report for 2/26/2012.^[48]

In 2009, he moved with his wife to The Retreat at Twin Lakes in Sanford, Florida, a multi-ethnic^[49] gated community, where the shooting occurred.^[50][51] He was employed as an insurance underwriter prior to the shooting^[52] and was in his final semester at Seminole State College for an Associates degree in Criminal Justice.^[53] His goal was to become a police officer.^[54]

Zimmerman's role in the neighborhood watch[link]

As the only person to volunteer when the homeowners association wanted to organize a community watch,^[55] Zimmerman was appointed coordinator by his neighbors, according to Wendy Dorival, Neighborhood Watch organizer for the Sanford Police Department.^[56] The homeowner's association told residents who saw suspicious activity to call Zimmerman if they could not contact the police.^[57] "[Zimmerman] once caught a thief and an arrest was made," said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association.^[55]

Police had been called to The Retreat at Twin Lakes 402 times from January 1, 2011, to February 26, 2012.^[55] Zimmerman was the caller on 11 of those calls in that time frame. Crimes committed at The Retreat in the year prior to Martin's death included eight burglaries, nine thefts, dozens of break-ins (at least one with a woman and infant upstairs) and one shooting. In September, Zimmerman was asked to head up a neighborhood watch.^[55] The City of Sanford posted a "George Zimmerman 911 Call History" listing 46 calls by him between 2004 and the 2012 shooting.^{[58][59][60][Note 2]}

Zimmerman had been licensed to carry a firearm since November 2009. An officer with Seminole County Animal Services had told Zimmerman not to rely on pepper spray to fend off a loose pit bull in the neighborhood; he told Zimmerman to "get a gun." Zimmerman had called the owner to complain about the dog after it had cornered his wife, and then called animal services on two other occasions to report that the dog was running loose.^[53]

Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated that neighborhood watch volunteers are not encouraged to carry a gun but have a Constitutional right to do so.^[55] Lee further stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."^[64]

Sanford Police volunteer program coordinator Wendy Dorival, told the Miami Herald that she met Zimmerman in September, 2011 at a community neighborhood watch presentation. “I said, ‘If it’s someone you don’t recognize, call us. We’ll figure it out,’  ‘Observe from a safe location.’ Dorival said.”^[55]

Police[link]

According to ABC News and other media organizations, multiple sources had indicated to them that Chris Serino, the lead investigator for the Sanford Police on the night of the shooting, stated in a February 26, 2012 affidavit that he was unconvinced by Zimmerman's version of events.^[65] Based on Serino's February 26 affidavit, police sought an arrest warrant for Zimmerman, however that request was denied by the Office of the State Attorney for insufficient evidence.^{[65][66][67][21][22][23][68]}

On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state's attorney asking for George Zimmerman to be charged with manslaughter.^[69][70] Serino stated in the request that "the encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and waited the arrival of law enforcement or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog (sic) in an effort to dispel each party's concern". "There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."^[71] The state attorney's office initially did not act on the request for an arrest warrant.^[70]

On March 16, 2012, Serino told the Orlando Sentinel that his investigation had turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman's account, that he had acted in self-defense. "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event, everything I have is adding up to what he says."^[67]

When special prosecutor Angela Corey was asked by the Miami Herald to confirm that the Sanford Police had initially recommended a manslaughter charge, she stated, "I don't know about that, but as far as the process, I can tell you that the police went to the state attorney with a capias request, meaning; We're through with our investigation and here it is for you." A capias is a request for charges to be filed. A source in the Seminole County State Attorney's office told the Miami Herald, "We get capias warrants all the time. That doesn't mean we file charges right away. We investigate to see if it's appropriate. That's the responsible thing to do.^[72]

Bill Lee, Chief of Police at the time of the shooting, received criticism for his role in the case. The Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to Chief Lee, and his handling of the case^[73] although the vote was advisory only.^[74] On March 22, 2012, Lee announced that he had temporarily stepped down from his position as chief of police, stating "my involvement in this matter is overshadowing the process."^[75] On April 23, 2012, the city of Sanford announced that Police Chief Bill Lee would resign but city commissioners voted to reject the resignation. Some commissioners had concerns about the fairness of Lee losing his job and the mayor stated he preferred to wait for the results of an investigation into Lee and his department. Lee was to remain on paid leave.^[76]

State Attorneys[link]

Norm Wolfinger was the state's attorney initially responsible for the case.^[77] He is responsible for prosecutions in Brevard and Seminole counties, where the shooting occurred.^[78]

On March 22, 2012, Florida Governor Rick Scott announced that he was appointing Angela Corey to be Special Prosecutor and that she would be investigating the case instead of Wolfinger.^[79] She is the State attorney for Duval, Clay and Nassau counties.^[80] After several weeks of investigation, Corey announced on April 11, 2012, that Zimmerman had been charged with second-degree murder.^[28][81]

George Zimmerman's attorneys[link]

Craig Sonner and Hal Uhrig were the first lawyers to represent George Zimmerman.^[82][83] On April 10, 2012, they announced at a news conference that they were withdrawing from the case as Zimmerman was no longer returning their calls and had been acting against their advice.^[84] According to Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, Sonner and Uhrig should not have disclosed those details and other information about Zimmerman after they had stopped representing him, because of considerations of attorney-client privileged information.^[85]

On April 11, 2012, it was announced that Zimmerman was represented by a new attorney, Mark M. O'Mara,^[30] who is board-certified as a criminal trial specialist.^[86] O'Mara pointed out that a small number of murder cases actually go to trial, with many cases resulting in a plea bargain. "We're not taking any possibilities off the table how this case gets resolved," he said. O'Mara described the intensely debated encounter between Martin and Zimmerman as resulting in "a deceased child," and also said, "Obviously, it was a horrible intersection of two young men's lives and it ended in tragedy."^[87][88] George Zimmerman's defense team has set up a Twitter account, a Facebook page and a website with a defense fund registered with the Florida Division of Consumer Services. O'Mara stated on the website that "Using social media in a high-profile lawsuit is new, and relatively unprecedented, but that is only because social media itself is relatively new. We feel it would be irresponsible to ignore the robust online conversation, and we feel equally as strong about establishing a professional, responsible, and ethical approach to new media."^[89][90][91]

Martin family attorneys[link]

Benjamin Crump, the lawyer representing the interests of the Martin family, operates a law firm in Tallahassee, Florida, with his partner Daryl Parks. The firm has eight lawyers who focus on wrongful death, malpractice, personal injury and civil rights.^[92][93] In 2006, Crump sued to have the video released in the case of Martin Anderson, a teenager who died at a boot camp run by the Bay County, Florida, Sheriff's Office.^[92][94][95] The Martin family is also represented by Natalie Jackson, an Orlando civil rights attorney.^[96][97]

Shooting[link]

Martin was staying with his father at the home of his father's fiancée.^[40] On his return from a convenience store,^[98][99] he was observed by Zimmerman,^[100] who was driving in his vehicle on a personal errand.^[101] At the end of their interaction, Martin was shot 70 yards (64 meters) from the rear door of the fiancée's townhouse.^{[102][Note 3]}

Zimmerman's early February, 2012, cell phone call to police[link]

Three weeks prior to the shooting, on February 2, 2012, Zimmerman placed a call to the Sanford Police Department to report a young man peering into the windows of an empty Twin Lakes home. Zimmerman was told a police car was on the way, and he followed protocol, awaiting their arrival. By the time police showed up, the suspect had fled. On February 6, 2012, workers witnessed two young black men lingering in the yard of a Twin Lakes resident around the same time her home was burglarized. A new laptop and some gold jewelry were stolen. The next day police discovered the stolen laptop in the backpack of a young black man, which led to his arrest. Zimmerman identified this young man as the same person he had spotted peering into windows on February 2.^[53]

Zimmerman's February 26, 2012, call to police[link]

While driving through the Twin Lakes neighborhood, at approximately 7:09:34 PM, February 26, 2012, Zimmerman used his cell phone to call the non-emergency number of the Sanford Police Department^[104] to report what he considered suspicious behavior by Martin. "We've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy."^[53] He described Martin as "just walking around looking about" in the rain.^[105] The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good or he is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain "looking at all the houses."^[106] On the recording of the call, Zimmerman is heard commenting "these assholes, they always get away."^{[107][108][109]}

At 2:07 minutes into his call to the police, Zimmerman says, "he's running." At 2:37 minutes, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, "he ran." The sound of an "open door" chime, a change in Zimmerman's voice and the sound of wind indicate that Zimmerman has left his vehicle, prompting the dispatcher to ask if Zimmerman is following Martin. When Zimmerman confirms that he is, the dispatcher says, "We don't need you to do that."^[110] Zimmerman says "OK." Asked if he "want(s) to meet with the officer," Zimmerman says "yeah" and gives directions to where his vehicle is parked but is unable to provide an address. He also tells the dispatcher the numbers of his street address, and then at 3:35 adds, "Oh crap, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is." The dispatcher asks him if he wants to meet the police at the mailboxes,^{[Note 3, 4th picture]} and he at first agrees but then says, "Actually, could you have him call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?" to which the dispatcher replies, "No problem."^[111] Zimmerman appears to hang up at the 4:05 mark. The recording ends at the 4:11 mark, approximately 7:13:41 PM.

Martin cell phone call from girlfriend[link]

Around the time of the incident, Martin was talking on his cellphone to his girlfriend, according to Attorney Benjamin Crump and State Prosecutor's, which was confirmed by phone company records.^[113][114] She called at 7:12 PM, although phone company records round down call times. Hence, the actual call was between 7:12:00 and 7:12:59 PM.^[115][116] She was interviewed by Crump who made a statement for her, as her parents requested her anonymity, and gave a sworn interview recorded by a state prosecutor.^[113][114]

Martin's girlfriend said that he described a man as "crazy and creepy," who was on the phone watching him from a vehicle, before the man started following him.^[114] The friend said that she told Martin to run to the townhouse, where he was staying with his father and the father's girlfriend.^[114] She said that Martin told her that he had lost the man and then noticed he was being pursued again.^[113][114] She then heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding, "What are you doing around here?"^[113][114] She said that she heard the sound of pushing^[113] and then heard Martin say what sounded like "get off, get off," and the call ended.^[114] She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.^[117]

Sanford Police arrival and initial investigation[link]

Police officer Timothy Smith arrived at the scene at approximately 7:17 PM. He reported finding Zimmerman standing near Martin, who was lying face down in the grass and unresponsive.^[14][17] At that time, Zimmerman stated to Smith that he had shot Martin and was still armed. Smith handcuffed Zimmerman and removed his weapon from him. Smith observed that Zimmerman's back was wet and covered with grass and he was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head.^[14][118]

Ricardo Ayala, the second officer to arrive that night, noticed Officer Smith had Zimmerman in custody, then observed Martin lying face down in the grass and attempted to get a response from him. At this time, Sgt. Anthony Raimondo arrived and together with Ayala began CPR. Paramedics from Sanford Fire and Rescue arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 PM^[14]

Other officers who had arrived by this time secured the area and made contact with neighbors in the area and obtained statements from witnesses at the scene. They did not realize Zimmerman had been in a vehicle, however, so it was moved before they could seize it.^[119] Zimmerman was treated and released by paramedics while still at the scene of the incident.^[14][118] After placing Zimmerman in his police vehicle, Officer Smith heard Zimmerman say, "I was yelling for someone to help me, but no one would help me."^[14][120] Zimmerman was then transported to the Sanford Police Department where he was questioned by investigators for approximately five hours.^[14][19]

Martin's body was taken to the morgue where he was tagged as a John Doe as he was not carrying any identification.^[23] Martin's father, Tracy Martin, called to file a Missing Persons report early on February 27 and police officers arrived at his fiancée's condo with photographs of his dead son around 9:20 am.^[23][121]

Witness accounts[link]

A witness to the confrontation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and punching him, while Zimmerman was yelling for help. This witness, who identified himself as "John", stated that "the guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911".^[123] He went on to say that when he got upstairs and looked down, "the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point.".^[123][124]

A 13-year-old boy walking his dog saw a man on the ground shortly before the shooting and identified him as wearing red.^{[125][126][127]} His mother later disputed the testimony and claimed that the police pressured him into choosing what color the man was wearing, and that her son could not see any details in the dark. She also stated that the police waited five days before requesting to even question her son and said the lead homicide investigator told her he did not believe the shooting was self defense.^[128][68]

Mary Cutcher and her roommate, Selma Mora Lamilla, appeared on AC 360 and Cutcher stated that she believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, but admitted that she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation.^{[129][130][131]} Cutcher and her roommate heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees straddling Martin on the ground.^[129][131] Mary Cutcher phoned police after the fatal shooting and said the black man was standing over another man, although Trayvon Martin was already dead.^[132] According to the Orlando Sentinel article, "Police spokesman Sgt. Dave Morgenstern [on March 15] issued a statement disputing Cutcher's version of events, calling her statements to WFTV "inconsistent with her sworn testimony to police."^[133] However, Cutcher and her roommate maintain that their account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and they demanded the police retract that incorrect statement.^[130]

On March 29, 2012, an eyewitness referred to as a male said that he saw two men on the ground scuffling, then heard the shooting, and saw Zimmerman walk away with no blood on him.^[134][135] The witness later appeared on CNN AC360 referred to as a female, giving more details on her account. She pointed out that she heard an argument between a younger and an older voice. The whole time she witnessed the incident the scuffling happened on the grass. She said that the larger man, who walked away after the gunshot, was on top, and that it was too dark to see blood on his face.^[136]

A witness who arrived shortly after the shooting revealed photos he took that night that showed "blood trickling down the back of Zimmerman's head from two cuts. It also shows a possible contusion forming on the crown of his head". In revealing the photo to ABC News in mid-April, he noted he heard but didn't see the scuffle, but was one of the first to arrive, and was the first to talk to Zimmerman after the shooting.^[18]

After the prosecutors made some discovery information available, the Orlando Sentinel quoted an eye witness statement which said a man had "witnessed a black male, wearing a dark colored 'hoodie' on top of a white or Hispanic male who was yelling for help." The witness said the black male was throwing punches "MMA [mixed martial arts] style." After hearing a "pop," he saw the black male "laid out on the grass."^[137][138] When the witness was interviewed several weeks later, after giving his first statement, he thought the black male was either punching or pinning the lighter skinned male underneath him. He was no longer certain who was calling for help, having not seen their mouths in the dark. He was still certain that the black male had been on top of the lighter-skinned male.^[139]

Martin's mother says the shouting for help heard on some of the 9-1-1 calls is her son's voice.^[140] Zimmerman's father, along with other relatives, have reviewed the 9-1-1 calls and identified the person screaming for help as Zimmerman.^[141] In a report, lead investigator Serino said that on Feb. 28, two days after the shooting, he played the 911 tapes for Tracy Martin, Trayvon's father. "I asked Mr. Martin if the voice calling for help was that of his son. Mr. Martin, clearly emotionally impacted by the recording, quietly responded 'No.'" Martin has since told reporters he was uncertain at that time, but that when he heard an enhanced recording on March 16 he was convinced it was his son calling for help.^[142] Martin's mother's perspective is relied upon in Corey's Affidavit of Probable Cause for second degree murder. The Zimmerman family perspective is not mentioned in the charging document.^[143]

Sanford police station[link]

The back of Zimmerman's head at the police station.^[144]

After arriving at the police station, Zimmerman was placed in an interview room where he was interviewed by Investigator D. Singleton.^[14][145] The gun, a black Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm semi-automatic pistol, taken from Zimmerman at the scene, was placed into evidence.^[15][146] Sometime after 11:21 AM Crime Scene Tech D. Smith photographed Zimmerman's injuries and hands and used a Gunshot Residue Kit to collect GSR in Interview Room 2 at Sanford PD. Zimmerman's clothes were taken as evidence after his wife arrived with a change of clothes.^[147]

Zimmerman was not administered a drug or alcohol test.^[17] Peter Bella, a retired Chicago Police forensic investigator, stated in an article for the Washington Times, "Except for DUIs, police cannot test suspects for drugs or alcohol, unless the accused demands or consents to it, or they get a warrant".^{[148][149][150]}

He also underwent voice stress analysis, a type of lie detector test, which he passed, and the day after the shooting he re-enacted the incident for police.^[119]

The lead homicide investigator on the case, Chris Serino, filed an affidavit the night of the incident saying he was unconvinced by Zimmerman's account and recommending charging Zimmerman with manslaughter, but was informed by State Attorney Wolfinger's office that there was not enough evidence to obtain a conviction.^[21] Zimmerman was eventually released without charges.^[17] TheGrio.com reported that Wolfinger met with police leaders on the night of the shooting while Zimmerman was still in police custody,^[151] but Wolfinger denies this.^[77] Instead, his spokesman said, police consulted that night with the prosecutor on call, Kelly Jo Hines.^[152]

George Zimmerman's account of events[link]

On the night of the shooting, and afterwards, Zimmerman described in detail, for the police and others, what took place.^{[141][153][154][155]}

Zimmerman said he was driving to the grocery store when he spotted Trayvon Martin walking through the neighborhood. Zimmerman's father said that, while his son was not on duty that night as Neighborhood Watch captain, there had been many break-ins and he thought it suspicious that someone he didn't recognize was walking behind the town homes instead of on the street or the sidewalk. Zimmerman therefore called a non-emergency police line to report Martin's behavior and summon police.^[156][157] During the call, Zimmerman told the dispatcher that Martin was "coming to check me out."^[10] A source to the Orlando Sentinel said that Zimmerman later told investigators that at one point Martin was circling his vehicle, and he rolled up his window to avoid a confrontation.^[153]

After telling the police dispatcher that Martin "ran,"^[10] Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed him on foot.^[153] The dispatcher confirmed that Zimmerman was following Martin and then said, "OK, we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman replied with "OK" and stated that Martin got away.^[10] After a discussion about where Zimmerman would meet police, the call ended, and Zimmerman told investigators he was returning to his vehicle when Martin approached him from his left rear and confronted him.^[153][154] According to Zimmerman's father, Martin asked Zimmerman, "Do you have a fucking problem?" Zimmerman replied "No, I don't have a problem", and while Zimmerman reached for his cell phone Martin said, "Well, you do now" or something similar,^[141][154] then punched him in the face, knocking him down, and began beating his head against the sidewalk.^[153][154] Zimmerman said he called out for help while being beaten, and at one point Martin covered his mouth to muffle the screams.^[153][154] According to Zimmerman's father, during the struggle while Martin was on top of Zimmerman, Martin saw the gun his son was carrying and said something to the effect of “You’re gonna die now” or “You’re gonna die tonight” and continued to beat Zimmerman.^[141] Zimmerman and Martin struggled over the gun, and Zimmerman shot Martin once in the chest at close range, in self-defense.^{[153][154][155][Note 4]}

Phone recordings[link]

Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012.^[106][158] Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that the gun was fired only once.^[159] Zimmerman told police at the scene that he had cried out for help.^[154] The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who said that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help.^[123] One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and said that the police tried to get her to change her testimony to their assertion that it was Zimmerman calling for help.^[160]

Independent experts vary in their interpretations of the low-quality audio of the phone recordings.^[161]The FBI was not able to determine whether it was Zimmerman or Martin who could be heard crying out for help in 911 calls, citing both poor audio quality and "the extreme emotional state of the person screaming."^[162][163]

Ongoing investigation[link]

Zimmerman was originally not charged with any crime. He asserted the right of self-defense and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that assertion.^[16][164] The State Attorney's office and Police Chief Lee said they did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this" and defended the investigation.^[165] "This is all very unsettling. I'm sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, February 26, he'd probably do things differently. I'm sure Trayvon would, too."^[55]

On March 20, 2012, State attorney Norm Wolfinger announced that a Seminole County grand jury would be convened on April 10, to investigate the death of Martin.^{[166][167][168]} However, State attorney Angela Corey, who was assigned to the case by Governor Rick Scott, stated that her office, not a grand jury, would decide whether to press charges in the shooting death of Martin. Angela Corey stated that, "I always lean towards moving forward without needing the grand jury in a case like this, I foresee us being able to make a decision, and move on it on our own."^[80] Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi said that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) was involved and "no stone will be left unturned in this investigation."^[167]

Medical records and autopsy[link]

On May 15, 2012 ABC News reported that a medical report compiled by the family physician of George Zimmerman showed that, following the alleged altercation with Martin, Zimmerman was diagnosed with a closed fracture of his nose, two black eyes, lacerations to the back of his head, a minor back injury, and bruising in his upper lip and cheek. According to the report, prior to the shooting Zimmerman had been prescribed Adderall and Temazepam. ^[169]

Martin's autopsy report was also released in May 2012.^[170] The examiner found the cause of death was a single gunshot wound of the chest, classifying the manner of death as "homicide". There were perforations of the heart and one lung, collapse of both lungs, and hemorrhaging in the pleural cavity. The examiner considered the bullet to have been fired "directly, front to back". There was no exit wound.

In looking at the entrance wound, the examiner assessed the gunshot as one fired from "intermediate range", which can mean from 1 to 18 inches, according to a forensics expert.^[171] The examiner noted "soot, ring abrasion, and a 2 x 2 inch area of stippling".

Besides the fatal gunshot wound, the examiner also noted a "1/4 by 1/8 inch small abrasion on the left fourth finger".

The autopsy report stated that Martin had trace levels of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, in his blood and urine.^[172][173] The toxicology report found the levels to be 1.5 nanograms/ml of THC and 7.3 nanograms/ml of THC-COOH, a metabolite of THC that can stay in the system for weeks after cannabis has been smoked.^[172][173] Larry Kobilinsky, a professor of forensic science stated that the THC amount was so low that it may have been ingested days earlier and played no role in Martin's behavior. "This kind of level can be seen days after somebody smokes".^[174]

Federal investigation[link]

On March 20, 2012, the Justice Department announced that it was opening investigations into the incident.^[175] The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting.^[176][177]

President Barack Obama, speaking to reporters on March 23 after federal investigators were deployed to Sanford, said, "When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids, and I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this," and, "If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon."^[178]

The FBI opened a parallel investigation into whether Martin's civil rights were violated, and interviewed witnesses and looked into Zimmerman's background.^[179]

Court proceedings[link]

Zimmerman was taken into custody on April 11, 2012, after being charged with second-degree murder in the Florida courts.^[1]

Charges[link]

On April 11, Florida State Attorney Angela Corey, the special prosecutor, announced that George Zimmerman had been charged with second-degree murder.^[180] In Florida, that charge carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and a minimum sentence of 25 years. She reported that Zimmerman had turned himself in to law enforcement and was arrested and placed in custody.^[1]

Pre-trial[link]

During an April 12 hearing, prosecutors presented an affidavit of probable cause alleging that Zimmerman had followed and confronted Martin.^[181] Judge Mark E. Herr ruled that there was probable cause for the case to continue. Zimmerman's lawyer Mark O'Mara requested that the court documents, including witness statements and other information, be sealed. The court granted the request.^[182] Zimmerman's arraignment was scheduled for May 29.^[183]

O'Mara asked for a new judge on April 16, 2012, saying Judge Jessica Recksiedler had a potential conflict of interest.^[184][185] On April 18, Judge Recksiedler agreed to disqualify herself from the case. Judge Kenneth Lester, Jr., was appointed by the chief judge to take over the Zimmerman case.^[186]

A motion was filed April 16, 2012, in Seminole County Circuit Court requesting that records in Zimmerman's case file be unsealed. A group of news organizations in Florida, including the Associated Press and The Miami Herald, challenged efforts to seal the records. Information such as full police reports, autopsy reports, and transcripts of witness interviews are normally public under Florida law. "The closure order and the manner in which it was entered are contrary to law," the news organizations said in the motion.^[187][188]

A bail hearing was held on April 20 and Judge Lester ruled that Zimmerman could be released on a $150,000 bond.^[32]At the hearing, Zimmerman took the witness stand and told the parents of Martin he was "sorry for the loss of your son".^[189][190] An investigator for the prosecution also admitted at the hearing that he did not know whether Martin or Zimmerman threw the first punch.^[190] He said there was no evidence to disprove Zimmerman's assertion that he was walking back to his vehicle when confronted by Martin.^[190] The investigator also stated that Zimmerman's claim of Martin slamming his head against the sidewalk was "not consistent with the evidence they found".^[190]

Zimmerman was released on bail at 12:05 a.m., April 23, 2012. He was fitted with an electronic monitoring device that can reveal his whereabouts in real-time.^[191]

Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, waived Zimmerman's right to appear at an arraignment on April 23, 2012, and entered a not guilty plea on his behalf.^[191]

Zimmerman's bond was revoked on June 1, 2012, when Judge Lester granted a Motion to Revoke Bond in which prosecutors accused Zimmerman and his wife of misrepresenting his financial situation to the court in April. The prosecution alleged that the defense, through Mrs. Zimmerman, lied to the court about the amount of money they had.^[192]

Prosecution's account of events[link]

According to the information alleged in the affidavit of probable cause, provided by investigators working for the State Attorney's office, the prosecution described what they say took place:^{[193] [194] [195] [196] [197][198]}

Martin was walking back from a nearby 7-Eleven store and was on his way to the townhouse where he was temporarily living when he was profiled by Zimmerman.^{[195][196][198]} Zimmerman was driving in his vehicle when he observed Martin and assumed he was a criminal.^[195][198] Feeling that Martin did not belong in the gated community where Zimmerman lived, he called the police to report Martin's behavior as suspicious.^[195][153] The dispatcher told Zimmerman an officer was on the way and to wait for him.^[195][193] In the call, Zimmerman made reference to people he felt had gotten away with break-ins in the neighborhood, and while talking about Martin, stated "these assholes, they always get away" and also said "these fucking punks".^{[195][197][198]}

During this time, Martin was on the phone with a friend and described to her what was happening.^{[195][196][197]} She said that Martin was scared because he was being followed by an unknown male and didn't know why.^[195][197] Martin attempted to run home, while Zimmerman exited his vehicle and started to follow Martin.^[197][194] When the dispatcher realized Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, he instructed Zimmerman not to do that and told him an officer would meet him. Zimmerman disregarded the dispatcher's instruction and continued to follow Martin.^[195][196] Investigators stated that Zimmerman then confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.^{[195][196][194]}

Witnesses heard people arguing and what sounded like a struggle and heard calls for help which were recorded in the 9-1-1 calls to police.^[195][198] Martin's mother reviewed the 9-1-1 calls and identified the voice crying for help as her son's.^{[195][198][140]} When police arrived at the scene, Zimmerman admitted to shooting Martin in the chest.^[195] An assistant medical examiner conducted an autopsy and determined that Martin had died from the gunshot.^{[195][198][Note 5]}

Public response[link]

Supporters of Trayvon Martin rally in Union Square during a "Million Hoodie March" in Manhattan on March 21.

Over 2.2 million signatures were collected on a Change.org petition, created by Martin's mother, calling for Zimmerman's arrest.^[200] It was the website's largest petition ever.^[201]

Since Martin was killed while wearing a hoodie, wearing a hoodie was seen as a sign of protest, and many cities across the U.S. staged "Million Hoodie Marches" or "hundred hoodie marches". Additionally, some professional athletes, including Carmelo Anthony and the entire Miami Heat roster, tweeted photos of themselves wearing hoodies.^{[citation needed]}

Fox News Channel host Geraldo Rivera claimed that Martin's "gangsta style clothing" was "as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was." Faced with outrage over his statement, Rivera later apologized, saying that he had "obscured the main point that someone shot and killed an unarmed teenager."^[202]

Additionally, bags of Skittles candy and cans of Arizona Iced Tea were used as protest symbols. Martin was returning from a 7-Eleven convenience store with these items when he was shot.^{[98][99][203]}

Walkouts were staged by students at over a dozen Florida high schools.^[204]

Thousands of people attended rallies around the country to demand Zimmerman's arrest.^[25] Members of the Occupy movement marched in solidarity during the "Million Hoodie March".^[205][206]

Speaking on the day of the Zimmerman arrest, Al Sharpton said: "45 days ago, Travon Martin was murdered. No arrest was made. The Chief of Police in Sanford announced after his review of the evidence there would be no arrest. An outcry from all over this country came."^[207]

Senior Fellow Shelby Steele at Stanford University's Hoover Institution lamented that the tragedy of Trayvon Martin's death is being exploited by a generation of "ambulance-chasing" black leaders who have promoted "our historical victimization as the central theme of our group identity."^[208]

A number of high-profile citizens have made public comments or released statements calling for a full investigation, including President Barack Obama,^[178] Reverend Al Sharpton,^[178][209] and Reverend Jesse Jackson.^[210]

According to Zimmerman's father, George Zimmerman received death threats and was forced to move out of his home.^[6] The New Black Panther Party offered a $10,000 reward for the "capture" of George Zimmerman;^[211][212] this was condemned by the city of Sanford.^[211]

In parts of the US, various acts of vandalism, assaults, and crimes have been connected in part to alleged revenge for the shooting of Trayvon Martin.^{[213][214][215][216][217]}

Film director Spike Lee retweeted to his 200,000 Twitter followers an erroneous Sanford, Florida address, purported to be Zimmerman's, which forced a family out of their home to avoid harassment after they received hate mail and unwanted visits from reporters.^{[218][219][220]} Lee was criticized for his retweet^[221] and he later issued an apology for having tweeted the wrong address.^[222]

Alan Dershowitz criticized the probable cause affidavit against Zimmerman as "so thin that it won't make it past the judge" calling it "irresponsible and unethical" and opined that the charges were motivated by prosecutor Corey's desire to be re-elected.^[223][224]

Bill O'Reilly of Fox News called for restraint and urged other pundits to stop trying the case in the media. He said that the case is a "tragedy" but should not be tried in the media. He stated that Martin's parents should be cut some slack in that regard.^[225]

Alleged race issues[link]

Allegations against Zimmerman[link]

Chicago protestors on March 28.

Zimmerman was accused of being motivated by racism^[2][117] and of having racially profiled Martin.^{[2][6][16][226]} His call to the police dispatcher was edited by NBC so that it appeared that Zimmerman had volunteered the race of Martin to police officers before being specifically asked.^[227]

Defense of Zimmerman's character[link]

In an open letter on March 15, Zimmerman's father, Robert Zimmerman, defended his son against allegations that his actions were racially motivated, stating that Zimmerman was Hispanic, was raised in a multiracial family, and "would be the last to discriminate for any reason whatsoever," saying that the portrayal of his son as a racist "could not be further from the truth." According to his family, some of Zimmerman's relatives are black.^[5] Zimmerman's former lawyer Craig Sonner stated that Zimmerman is not a racist, and that he had mentored black youths in the past.^[228] Joe Oliver, a former television news reporter who is acquainted with Zimmerman,^[229] noted "I'm a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color."^[230]

In early April, an anonymous letter to the NAACP, which was signed "A Concerned Zimmerman Family Member," said Zimmerman had been one of the few to take any action to protest the 2010 beating of Sherman Ware, a black homeless man, by the son of a Sanford police officer. Zimmerman reportedly distributed fliers in the black community trying to get others involved too, and helped organize a January 8, 2011, city hall meeting to protest the incident.^[231] His father confirmed his efforts.^[232]

On May 23, 2012, the Miami Herald reported that Zimmerman was recorded criticizing the Sanford Police Department and its former chief, Brian Tooley, at the city hall meeting on Ware's beating. Zimmerman said police had engaged in a "cover-up" and that Tooley should lose his pension. He also said he'd been on ride-alongs with Sanford police where he found them to be lazy. The Herald also reported that it had recently contacted five out of six churches where a Zimmerman relative said he had distributed fliers on the Ware beating, but none recalled receiving them, and Martin family attorney Natalie Jackson, who represented Sherman Ware, denied that Zimmerman had been involved in protesting the incident.^[96]

Allegations against the Sanford police[link]

For not arresting Zimmerman, the Sanford police faced heavy criticism, protests, and allegations of racial bias.^[2] The NAACP wrote U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder expressing "no confidence that, absent federal oversight, the Sanford Police Department will devote the necessary degree of care to its investigation" and requesting that personnel be detailed to Sanford to review the case without bias."^[16][117] Lee repeatedly defended the investigation, stating that the Sanford police did not feel they had conducted a racially biased investigation and welcomed a review of their efforts.^[160][226]

Allegations were also made that the Sanford police were protecting Zimmerman.^[154] Lee told reporters that they could not arrest Zimmerman because no evidence contradicted his story, and that to do so would leave the police open to litigation.^[226] In regards to the 9-1-1 dispatcher telling Zimmerman that "We don't need you to [follow him],"^[233] Lee said "That is a call taker making a recommendation to him. He's not under a legal obligation to do that, so that is not something we can charge him with."^[16]

On March 21, 2012, three out of the five members of the Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to the police chief Bill Lee, and his handling of the case; however, the vote is advisory only.^[73] The following day, Lee announced that he had temporarily stepped down from his position as chief of police, stating "my involvement in this matter is overshadowing the process." Lee further stated, "I do this in the hopes of restoring some semblance of calm to a city which has been in turmoil for several weeks."^[75]

"Stand your ground" laws[link]

Self-defense laws in the United States, particularly regarding justifiable homicide, vary by state. Florida law, as of 2005, includes a "stand your ground" provision, under which a person, who reasonably fears death or great bodily harm (the ordinary deadly self-defense requirement) is relieved of the common-law requirement that one first attempt to retreat, if one can safely do so, before using deadly force.^[234] In almost all states, such laws exempt people in their own homes; Florida's version extends the no-retreat doctrine to vehicles and public places. In at least 17 states, including Florida, there is no duty to retreat before using force.^[235][236] After the shooting, media reports had indicated that Zimmerman would most likely use the "Stand Your Ground" provision in Florida's self-defense law. According to Durell Peaden, one of the sponsors of the Florida law, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. "When [Zimmerman] said 'I'm following him', he lost his defense."^[237] However, the same article goes on to state, "Peaden and Baxley said they didn't know all the facts of the case, so their interpretations of what happened could change if new information arises during the investigation."^[237]

According to analysis by David Kopel, Florida's Stand Your Ground Law "is legally irrelevant to [the] case", and the case turns on whether Martin initially attacked Zimmerman, or whether the initial attack was by Zimmerman attacking Martin.^[238]

The Florida Statute excepts persons engaged in "unlawful activity" from protection by the Stand Your Ground provision: (3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.^[239]

On March 19, 2012, Florida authorities announced they had picked 17 people to head up a task force to review the Florida statute that deals with justifiable use of force, including the stand your ground provision. It was decided that the group would hear arguments and testimony from residents at public meetings across the state and pass along recommendations to the governor and the legislature.^[240]

Media coverage[link]

Trayvon's father Tracy Martin, family attorney Benjamin Crump and mother Sybrina Fulton, at the 'Million Hoodies' protest in Union Square, New York

For the first 10 days after Martin's death, the story was covered by only the Florida media.^[241] In order to bring more attention to the case, Martin family attorney Natalie Jackson sought the assistance of Orlando publicist Ryan Julison.^[23]

On March 7, 2012, Reuters covered the story,^[242][23] and the following day, CBS News, acting on a tip it received from the network's local bureau in Atlanta, Georgia, obtained an exclusive interview with Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton that was broadcast on CBS This Morning.^[241][243] Benjamin Crump, the family's attorney, who had been retained to pursue legal action and to persuade the news media to cover the case, arranged for the interview to take place.^[241]

Also on March 8, The Huffington Post, The Young Turks, and TheGrio.com, which is affiliated with NBC News, started to cover the case.^{[241][244][245][246]} On March 9, 2012, ABC World News featured the story on their nightly broadcast.^[247] CNN first reported on the case on March 12, 2012, and by the end of that week, radio hosts and bloggers were also reporting on the story.^[241][248] National coverage started to increase the week of March 12 and intensified after March 16, when tapes of 9-1-1 calls were released to the public.^[241][249] Having the 9-1-1 calls, which the police had previously declined to release, gave radio and TV reporters more material to report on.^[241][249]

The Project for Excellence in Journalism has reported that media coverage of the Trayvon Martin case became the first story in 2012 to be featured more than the presidential race. According to the Project, the varying types of media have focused on the case in different ways. An article in the Tampa Bay Times wrote that, "on Twitter, people are outraged at Zimmerman and want justice, while on cable news and talk radio people are discussing the state's laws for self-defense and gun control and on blogs the focus has been on race."^[250]

Aspects of coverage[link]

Controversy over photos of Martin and Zimmerman[link]

The Associated Press noted that initially the most widely used media photo of Martin was several years old and showed him as a "baby-faced boy," rather than as a young man in his late teens. To represent Zimmerman, the media chose a shot of a beefy 21 year-old Zimmerman taken seven years prior to the shooting, whereas recent photos show him as slim-faced and more mature. The two outdated photos chosen by the media may have helped shape the initial public perception of the shooting. The AP quoted academic Kenny Irby on the expected effect, "When you have such a lopsided visual comparison, it just stands to reason that people would rush to judgment", and another academic, Betsi Grabe, as saying that journalists will present stories as a struggle between good and evil "[i]f the ingredients are there".^[251]

Reporting on Zimmerman call to dispatcher[link]

Economist and commentator Thomas Sowell criticized the national media for implying that Zimmerman had continued to follow Martin after the police dispatcher said "We don't need you to do that." He said that they mostly left out Zimmerman's answer, "O.K." because "too many people in the media see their role as filtering and slanting the news."^[252]

After the audio of the call was released, CNN^[253] and other reports alleged Zimmerman had said "fucking coons," two minutes and twenty-one seconds (2:21) into the call. Two weeks later on April 4, 2012, CNN claimed that enhanced audio revealed that Zimmerman had said "fucking cold".^[254] The following day, April 5, 2012, CNN's Martin Savidge reported that forensic audio expert Tom Owen claimed it was "fucking punks".^[255] It is said to be "fucking punks" in the affidavit of probable cause, dated April 11, 2012.^[181] Other reviewers of the call have offered alternate interpretations of what was said, including "unintelligible". According to the Associated Press, the alleged racial slur "fed growing outrage over the police department's initial decision not to arrest Zimmerman".^{[256][257][110][258]}