Another matter taken up after court was the state's motion to strike the testimony of defense witness John Donnolly, a friend of Zimmerman's and medic during the Vietnam War. He was one of several of Zimmerman's friends who testified today it was Zimmerman screaming for help in Jenna Lauer's 911 call.

The state moved to strike Donnelly's testimony because at the time it deposed Donnelly, he had not listened to the 911 call so the state didn't ask him if he could identify the person screaming. Donnelly told O'Mara on Saturday he recently listened to the 911 call and he thought it was GZ screaming, so O'Mara called him as a witness, but didn't tell the state he would identify Zimmerman's voice in his testimony. The court refused to strike the testimony, saying the state was not prejudiced.

The court also addressed the state's objection to defense expert George Root who will testify as to the use of force. The state objected to Root providing his opinion that Zimmerman did not use excessive force and his actions were lawful. The court said the expert could not state those opinions, but I don't think she ruled out his testimony altogether. I would have to watch the segment again, but I think Root can still explain use of force to the jury.

The court then moved to the issue of the defense computer animation. Interestingly, she said there would have to be a Daubert hearing on the matter, since Frye was no longer the law as of July 1. (At the hearing on voice experts, she proceeded under Frye.) The court took a recess to wait for the arrival of the animation expert. When he arrived, the state said it had no Daubert objections to the animation. Now, its objecton was that the expert who created the animation talked to defense expert Vincent di Maio Saturday or Sunday and the state just found this out earlier today. The state now wants to depose them both again, and the matter is continued until tomorrow. The judge did not seem very impressed with that argument -- she told the state to depose the animation expert today after court recesses, and to depose di Maio by phone.

There's another defense proffer scheduled for tomorrow, someone whose name O'Mara and the judge carefully avoided mentioning, but the prosecutor and O'Mara disclosed it. [Correction: the name is Richard Connor not Robert O'Connor, who is a former Sanford Police Captain. Sorry for the confusion.) I would bet he is Richard Connor of ESI Consultants, a computer/phone forensics expert in Orlando, and that the proffer refers to something from Martin's phone that he intends to authenticate or testify about. Don West addressed the court about how long the proffer would take, which means he will be presenting the witness. West has handled all of the phone forensic issues in the case.

Whatever Connor's testimony concerns, if it requires a proffer, there is something in it that the state is objecting to, and the judge has agreed to hear the proffer before he takes the stand. If I had to guess, I'd say it's the texts about fighting which the judge previously ruled would be admissible provided:

If a contemporaneous objection is made, the offering party may be required to establish the relevance, authenticity, and admissibility of such evidence before it may be presented to the jury.

As to testimony today, Tracy Martin testified that he believed the voice on the call was that of his son. He denied that he told Officer Serino it was not his son's voice when Serino played it for him three days after the shooting. He said he told Serino he wasn't sure because he was still in shock and denial over his son's death. Martin also denied instructing his lawyer to publicly state that the Sanford police had lied in claiming Tracy Martin said it was not his voice. (See Legal Insurrection for greater detail on today's "scream" witnesses.)

On March 16, after several family members including Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton listened to the tapes at the Mayor's office, Crump held a press conference and said the police had lied. Crump said that Tracy Martin told Serino the voice was too distorted to make out, and now that he had been able to listen to a cleaned up version, he recognized the voice as that of his son. Crump also accused the police of lying to the Martins at the press conference he held to announce his discovery of Rachel Jeantel, Martins' (non)minor (non) girlfriend who he claimed blew Zimmerman's defense out of the water.

The defense called Officer Serino and Officer Singleton, both of whom testified Tracy Martin had denied it was his son's voice when Serino played the tape for Martin a few days after the shooting. Serino did not know Singleton was present in the area and had overheard Martin's reply.

Former Police Chief Bill Lee then testified that allowing the family members to listen to the call together was improper for identification purposes, and he voiced his opinion but was disregarded.

Firearms/ballistics expert and pathologist Vincent Di Maio will likely testify tomorrow. He will testify the bullet evidence shows Martin was over Zimmerman at the time he was shot, leaning over him, and the bullet entered at a 90 degree angle. Don West outlined di Maio's theory in opening.

There seem to be a lot of loose ends. Will the state recall Rachel Jeantel? Has the defense deposed Benjamin Crump yet? Will he be called as a witness? And will the defense call witnesses to show the state has misrepresented his prior calls to non-emergency? The prior calls will be the topic of my next post, since the state is piggy-backing them onto call reporting Martin as suspicious as evidence of his ill-will, hatred and spite.

I would also expect Grace Zimmerman, George's sister, to be called to testify she texted with George right before he left the house for Target the night of the shooting, as corroboration for his version of events. Here are Zimmerman's phone records for the time period of 6 pm to 7:18 p.m. They also show he called non-emergency twice, at 7:08 and 7:20. Either the records are a minute off, or Zimmerman did have trouble getting through the first time (since the call didn't connect until 7:09:34) and Officer Smith, who arrived at the complex in his car at 7:17, didn't get around to the back until 7:20 pm. Since Jonathan Manalo didn't take his picture of Zimmerman until 7:19, and he testified he took the photo before Smith arrived, it seems the phone records might be correct. If Zimmerman was at the clubhouse calling non-emergency at 7:08 pm, does that make his version of events as to when he first saw Martin and when he first lost sight of Martin more credible?

Lastly, what about lesser included offenses? Will the jury receive an instruction on both manslaughter by act and culpable negligence or just manslaughter by act?