Another familiar trend was the State’s tendency to ask questions to
which they obviously didn’t know the answers, and getting blown up as a
result. For example, Guy sought to have Root state that the likely
screamer could have been Trayvon Martin, if Zimmerman were pointing a
gun at him. Putting aside the fact that there is absolutely no evidence
to support such a scenario, the question blew up in guy’s face when
Root instead indicated that if he were in Trayvon Martin’s position,
beating Zimmerman, and he saw Zimmerman’s gun, his most likely move
would be to go for the gun–exactly as Zimmerman says Martin actually
Then on re-cross, State prosecutor Guy simply imploded, as the State has
so often. Guy asked whether it wasn’t true that GZ had other options,
besides using his gun. Root answered, “No, given the totality of the
circumstances, I don’t believe Zimmerman had any other option.” It was
almost as if the State had never deposed Root before, had simply never
met this witness before his testimony in the courtroom.
Finally Guy was back on cross, and flailing even worse, if that’s imaginable. He challenged Root that he had never testified on behalf of a criminal defendant. “No, I have, twice, it’s in my CV,” answered Root. He challenged Root that the force continuum described was limited in its application to law enforcement. No, Root observed, it’s a simple conceptual model that’s effectively integrated in Florida’s self-defense statutes.
And the judge is no great shakes, either.