When the State released the initial discovery, it filed this handy summary exhibit of discovery provided. (The exhibit includes a chart of Witnesses 1 -22, with enough space for case followers to write down who's who.)

Included in the released discovery on May 15, was this list of categories of items it claimed to be exempt from public disclosure, with specific statutory citations.

Now the state is seeking to seal some more items from public view, including some which it previously released, like the first 911 call in which the shot is clearly heard.

Here is the state's justification for keeping George Zimmerman's statements sealed.

Even though I think Florida's public records law is overbroad and that criminal discovery in general should not be provided to the media in advance of trial, given that the law is in effect, I have some issues with some of the state's requests.

The state wants to keep secret the results of a test done on Zimmerman done by Officer William Ervin. It says the test may not be admissible as the science behind it hasn't been established. That's the voice stress test GZ took at the police station either the night of the shooting or the next day that he reportedly passed. (Obviously, he did pass, or the state wouldn't mind releasing it.) Is admissibility of the sought-to be discovered item determinative of whether information is subject to public records?

I can see the policy argument behind sealing witness names, but not street addresses or location. This whole case revolves around who was in a position to see and hear what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. Some of the witnesses have repeatedly gone on TV to discuss what they now think they saw and heard, even though it differs from what they said originally.(Not surprisingly, these are not the witnesses with the best opportunity to hear or observe the most critical events.) If a witness goes on TV, or says in a police statement, she was 10 or 19 feet from the site of the shooting, shouldn't the media be allowed to refute that by showing the witness' true location?

Still, since the request may be granted, I redid my map of the witness locations, leaving out the witness' names and addresses, and identifying them by witness number and location.

I believe the most critical witnesses are in three pairs:

• W-11 and W-20 (first 911 caller and "Jeremy")
• W- 6 and W-17 ("John" who saw part of struggle and GZ on the bottom, struggling to get up, and his fiance)
• W- 13 and W-12 (first person to encounter GZ after shooting,take photos of his injuries and call his wife)

W-18 is the former teacher who has given numerous statements to the media. W-5 and 16 are the roommates. W-14 and 15 are 13 year old Austin and his sister. W-1 and W-2 are sisters who didn't see anything. W-19 is a woman who was going to let her dog out and heard yells for help.

Who are the other witnesses besides those on the map?

• W-8: Trayvon's phone friend Dee Dee. The state has her cell phone records as well as Trayvon Martins' but it wants to keep them sealed.

• W-9: A woman unrelated to the investigation who phoned in 2 days after the shooting to say how well she knew GZ and he had racial animus. The state released part of a later interview between W-9 and an officer Perkins, and it's reportedly his cousin.[Edited to reflect it's not his ex-fiance.] How can someone accuse another person of being a racist and demand her identity be shielded? I doubt she will be a witness since her information is not relevant to the murder charge (or even to profiling) and it was so long ago and has not been corroborated.

• W-22: A former co-worker from years ago who said GZ taunted him as being stupid and made fun of him in front of other co-workers, sometimes using the accent of a character in a cartoon show about terrorists (the man is middle-eastern but says he doesn't think that's the reason George picked on him, it was because he was new and George thought he was stupid.) Totally won't be witness.

• W-21 is the board president for the homeowner's association. He describes how the neighborhood watch started (after a string of burglaries), the police participation in getting it going, and that more than 50 people attended the first meeting, where George was appointed by the board to be watch captain. (The police representative puts the number at 25, but still, that's a far cry from only George and one or two of his buddies.) He says the watch group met the same days as the Board, just an hour earlier. He says George went around the neighborhood for a week or two asking people to support the creation of the board (not asking to lead it). Another example of misreporting by mainstream media, which continually referred to GZ as the "self-appointed" watch captain. (According to Lexis, the first use of the "self-appointed" meme came from a certain Miami Herald reporter, both in print and on TV, and seems to have spread virally from there. One night Diane Sawyer called him "the neighborhood watchdog" on the evening news which got spread by reporters from the Caribbean to Toronto.)

• There are no witnesses designated 4 or 10. How come? Do they exist? They must have at one time.

The other witnesses are listed by name, not number.

To clear up a few matters I've seen around here in comments:

• George Zimmerman's father told police in his interview (initiated at Mr. Zimmerman's request) that he did not speak to GZ the night of the shooting, he spoke to GZ's wife. So when GZ voluntarily agreed to be interviewed that night, it wasn't after receiving advice from his father. Same for the stress test if it that night.

• Also according to Mr. Zimmerman, George went to the grocery store after dinner every Sunday night to get the groceries for the coming week. It had nothing to do with the neighborhood watch, but he was concerned about burglaries in the neighborhood.

• The daytime photos of the shooting scene and various houses at Twin Lakes were taken the day after the shooting by Crime Scene Tech Diana Smith.

• The Arizona Ice Tea can was initially found in the center pocket of Trayvon's sweatshirt.

• Trayvon Martin was wearing a dark gray hooded Fruit of the Loom sweatshirt with a light gray Nike sweatshirt (or lighter gray shirt with long sleeves) underneath. All the police reports refer to the hoodie as ME-8 and the lighter shirt as ME-12. (Here's a similar reference in Chris Serino's report.) But, the DNA and gun residue reports label the hoodie as ME-12 and the lighter shirt as ME-8. So it's not clear which results came from the hoodie and which from the lighter gray shirt or whether any of the testing can be considered reliable.

• My own question: Where's the report for the test results on the two swabs of blood evidence from the bag of skittles and the black flashlight? Serino's report says DSM-6 is the black flashlight found in the grass between buildings near marker #5, and DSM-10 contained the skittles (along with the photo button, lighter and headphones which he lists as found in Trayvon's pockets. And where were the headphones? In his pocket or on the grass? Some officers say the grass, others say his pocket. Was he even wearing headphones while talking to DeeDee or had he removed them and put them in his pocket?

Unless the state has packed some good stuff in this next round of discovery, I'm not seeing much of a case. Most of the state's witnesses seem to help George Zimmerman's self-defense case, and the others don't hurt it.

Please keep in mind that my goal here is to analyze the case in terms of what the state can and cannot prove. I am not trying to figure out what really happened. Trials are not designed to be a search for the truth. They are merely a process for the testing of evidence, to determine if the state can carry its burden by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.