The following is a LIVE, ongoing rundown of the day's testimony in the George Zimmerman trial for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.
The most recent updates from the courtroom Tuesday are on top.
———————————————
Evidence hearing
9:58 p.m.
She says what was presented to the court has nothing identifying Martin.
“Anybody could have picked up that phone and sent these text messages,” Judge Nelson says.
She says there are no identifying marks and it is a concern.
West says some messages required two passwords. Judge Nelson says another person could know the password.
West says there’s no indication anyone else used the phone.
West says he doesn’t know what else they could do when the state didn’t give them the messages in a timely manner.
West says they asked for time and he doesn’t know what else they could do.
He says it’s “simply unfair” and claims the state played games and lied.
Judge Nelson lets the state respond.
Guy says he would allow West to apologize for accusing him of standing by silently about information he didn’t have.
Judge Nelson says court is in recess until 8 a.m. to take up the issue of Donnelly’s issues.
O’Mara says he was not able to prepare his witnesses for the next day.
West says he’s not physically able to keep up the case as Judge Nelson walks out.
Court is in recess until 8 a.m.
9:51 p.m.
Guy finishes.
West offers further argument.
West says the content of the messages are what they are and should be presented to the jury.
He says the case is mired by the presentation of evidence, mentioning the report received on June 4.
West says there was an ongoing discovery issues, but it’s not true that they were given everything.
He calls Guy’s authentication issue illusory.
West says they were misled when they were given a report and the bin file. He says the report was misleading.
He says the state knew about the missing photos.
Judge Nelson says she does have an authentication issue.
She cites cases about electronic messages.
9:46 p.m.
West says not admitting the evidence would violate a part of the state’s constitution and the defendant’s right to confront.
West says the evidence is a step in the process of allowing Zimmerman to present a defense.
Judge Nelson asks for the response.
Guy says West made his point that the messages are speculation and there is no knowledge about the type of fight being talked about or even a code for something else.
Guy says we don’t know if Martin was fighting Andre the Giant or a little girl.
He says its unknown who typed the messages.
West asks about the lawyers exchanging cross examination and argument.
Guy says Connor was Mantei’s witness, but it was his argument and that’s why they did it.
Guy says the danger is exactly what West put before the court of a fight with a referee and none of it is specified in the messages.
Guy says there’s no knowledge of when the photo of Martin was taken and the best ones are the ones already in evidence.
9:36 p.m.
West mentions the content of the messages about fighting.
He says the relative physical capabilities of the person are relevant, including Martin’s experience in fights.
He says it is relevant because he says the state took great efforts to make it relevant for Zimmerman and the testimony of Folgate about Zimmerman speaking to her about his exercise with MMA.
“It’s likewise relevant in our case because the jury is going to have to make that decision,” West says.
He says it is compelling evidence to Zimmerman’s self-defense claim.
9:28 p.m.
West says mentions Rachel Jeantel testimony which he says closes the loop for authentication of Martin’s mention of fighting.
West says he has an excerpt of the deposition to offer as an exhibit.
West asks for Zimmerman’s curfew to be extended. Judge Nelson grants a 30 minute extension.
Judge Nelson says she doesn’t have a picture of a gun as an exhibit.
She asks what part of the evidence code he is using to have it all introduced.
West says the picture of Martin shows his physique.
The picture of the gun is not directly related to the fighting issues, he says.
Two legal grounds relate to the messages about fighting.
He says he's not addressing the gun pictures because he doesn't think they've connected it in front of the jury yet.
9:18 p.m.
Connor describes how an application hid the pictures in the phone.
Connor is excused.
Judge Nelson says she will hear argument.
9:15 p.m.
Connor says Martin’s name was not on the account. He confirms it was on a family account.
Connor says the discussion was about a gun and the last one was someone trying to buy a gun from Martin.
Connor says he was not there when the message where typed, but when viewing thousands of messages on a phone, he says he gets a flavor for the person and he can get a pretty good idea if it is the same person.
He was not there when the photos were taken, he says.
The picture of the gun is the same one repeated three times.
Mantei asks about the deletion of the items.
Connor confirms anyone could have done it. He says he cannot tell when the deletions were done.
Mantei asks if hypothetically a parent might’ve deleted things. Connor says there’s nothing in the data that tells him when things were deleted but he can look for patterns.
Mantei asks if Zimmerman could’ve known anything that was on the phone the night of the shooting.
Connor says he doesn’t know.
West asks about the mass deletions.
Connor says certain subjects to certain people were deleted. He confirms messages about drugs and drug use were deleted, along with ones about guns.
He says there is no indication someone deleted things en masse.
Connor confirms there was pornography on the phone.
Judge Nelson says it has nothing to do with the scope of the proffer, but she understands West’s point.
9:08 p.m.
Connor says messages to another person also talked about a fight.
He reads the messages.
Connor says a Facebook message from Martin’s half-brother asked him when he was going to teach him how to fight.
West submits them as evidence for the proffer.
Connor says the pictures of the handgun were taken by the phone.
West finishes questioning.
Mantei cross examines.
8:56 p.m.
West moves to the exhibit of the messages about fighting.
Connor says it came from Martin’s phone.
He says he created the spreadsheet, which is a log table of the text messages.
He says messages went back and forth from and to Martin about a fight.
The first message is “wyd,” which Connor says means “what you doing?”
West has him read the rest of the messages.
8:47 p.m.
Connor says he also extracted messages of Martin describing being in at least one fight.
He says there was data not analyzed by the software and when he manually examined it, he saw text messages that appeared to be created by an
Android app he says was designed to hide text messages.
Connor says a couple things got his attention when he ran keyword searches and got hits for what looked like texts but they weren’t in the right place.
He says another indication was the SPC database was listed, but there was no parsed data from it.
Connor said he knew those types of apps existed. He says the user would have to pull up the app and put in the passcode.
He says it would take at least two passcodes for a user to access the locked messages on the phone.
8:40 p.m.
Connor says the messages will show if they were in the in or out folder, who it was for or came from, and more, which is all indicated on the reports.
West asks about the other person asking about the purchase of a firearm.
Connor says they were between Feb. 18 and Feb 22, 2012.
Connor lists the other people in the conversations.
Connor says there were messages mentioning Martin going to Sanford.
West asks about the exhibit showing the picture appearing to be of Martin from the cell phone.
Connor says there was no metadata in that picture identifying the device that took the picture.
8:35 p.m.
He says he ran keyword searches against the bin files for the text messages.
He also looked through the databases and identified more photos not part of the report that included a picture of a hand holding a gun taken by that phone.
Connor says there were several text exchanges where he says Martin was trying to buy or sell a handgun, plus pictures showing the gun on a table and in a hand.
He says they were marked as deleted, but the data was still on the phone.
Connor says pictures normally stay on a device until deleted or removed. He says devices can go bad and can be deleted without the user’s intention.
Judge Nelson says they could be deleted by anyone and the question is asking him to speculate.
Connor says it is his opinion the pictures were deleted on purpose.
He says the phone had a passcode.
8:28 p.m.
O’Mara waives Zimmerman’s appearance for him to step out of the courtroom.
West says another exhibit contains photographs found on the phone.
West says he would like to admit his CV as evidence. Judge Nelson says she hasn’t determined if he could be heard before the jury.
Connor says he is a member of the Florida bar and certified by Cellebrite.
He says he received several Bin files for the case, one of which was a data dump from the memory of Martin’s phone.
He used the Cellebrite software to analyze Martin’s phone and identified hidden and deleted texts and Facebook messages.
Connor says when the data is loaded into the software it runs scripts that analyze the data.
He says the bin file is like an image of the phone’s data. He says the picture numbers in the state attorney’s report didn’t match in his software.
8:16 p.m.
West says he would like to proffer Connor’s testimony to put the texts in context.
Judge Nelson she would like it kept to just where he found the messages.
West says he thinks his qualifications are important.
She says she can read his CV.
West says Guy misses the argument. He says the evidence relates directly to the physical capabilities of Martin and his knowledge of fighting.
Judge Nelson says Connor will not testify about that.
She says she wants to hear the limited proffer.
8:13 p.m.
West says other exhibits relate to a gun. He says the crux of the issue is the messages about fighting.
He says pictures were retrieved from Martin’s phone showing a hand wrapped around a firearm.
He says Martin had several conversations with several people trying to acquire a firearm.
John Guy says they are back where they started with a motion filed earlier. He says they wouldn’t help the jury and they are reputation evidence and there is an authentication issue.
“It could be a verbal fight, a play fight or a slap fight,” Guy says.
Guy says his objection is that it is speculation as to what any of it means and there is no context and is completely misleading and shouldn’t be allowed.
8:07 p.m.
West mentions text messages from Martin’s found about a firearm.
He says the fighting issue is at issue and text messages of Martin fighting, losing a round, bloodied a guy’s nose and another text with a girlfriend explained the fight.
West mentions a Facebook post from Martin’s half-brother asking when he would teach him how to fight.
West says a hidden file in Martin’s phone was only password accessible.
He says Connor’s testimony would explain how he accessed the phone and show only Martin could have created the texts.
8:03 p.m.
Mantei says Dr. Di Maio also said it was possible Trayvon could’ve been pulling back.
He says any witness that could’ve used this as demonstrative already testified and didn’t need it.
Mantei says Schumaker’s assumptions are not accurate and built into the animation, which he says points out the frailty of the exhibit.
The lights went out, which Judge Nelson says they automatically do.
Judge Nelson says she’ll rule on it at 8 a.m.
She says the next issue is Mr. Conner’s testimony.
Judge Nelson says if it has to do with Martin’s phone she can look at the information intended to be introduced and she can make a determination.
West says there needs to be a proffer.
Judge Nelson says she only needs to know he found information and the procedure he found it is not a factor.
She asks to see the evidence that would be submitted through Mr. Conner.
West says the issue is ongoing because of the way discovery went on.
7:58 p.m.
Judge Nelson says she doesn’t see where it will assist an expert in testifying.
O’Mara says it will assist the jury.
Judge Nelson says the animation is more than a timeline.
Judge Nelson says the animation that could go back to the jury room give a certain weight to it.
She asks for case law.
O’Mara says he relies on Pierce and the determination is that it is substantially similar it is admissible.
Judge Nelson says in the Pierce case the computer animation exhibit would be a demonstrative exhibit only.
She cites more of the case.
She says she understands both arguments and she will read the case law.
Mantei says he has some issues.
He says Schumaker never mentioned Dr. Roa. He says the timeline the state presented was based on testimony only, but none of the animation is in testimony except for Lauer's 911 call.
7:46 p.m
Mantei says Dr. Di Maio’s testimony was that the defendant’s statement was consistent and Schumaker’s use of that isn’t all he used.
Mantei says Schumaker used the defendant’s testimony about Martin throwing the first punch.
He says the court should fashion a significantly strong instruction for the jury.
7:40 p.m.
Mantei says this is “Ironman” and it’s one thing to say you’re strapping suits on someone and creating fiction and then trying to create reality.
Mantei says he’s not saying the animation has to be exact, but the idea is that if it is not accurate enough, it shouldn’t be allowed.
He points out the length of space from the gun and the placement of the hips.
He says the problem is it is argument masquerading as evidence.
7:30 p.m.
Mantei says Schumaker has never testified in court about the type of information he is presenting.
Judge Nelson asks to interrupt. She asks what the difference would be if he stepped off the stand and did a drawing rather than use computer software to do it.
Judge Nelson explains the difference between a Daubert issue and an admissibility issue.
Mantei says the animation is being asked for use as evidence.
He says the standard is higher. He says if it was demonstrative he probably would not object under Daubert.
Mantei says Dr. Di Maio testified clearly without it.
Mantei says it could be part of a closing argument, but then his argument is if it is necessary to explain an opinion.
He says Schumaker’s testimony is only an interpretation of what the attorneys gave him.
7:23 p.m.
O’Mara says the animation was modified based on Jon Good’s testimony
Judge Nelson asks about Lauer’s testimony and that she didn’t see anything. She asks how the animation can be made based on what someone heard and didn’t see.
O’Mara says she testified to hearing a back and forth conversation behind her home.
Judge Nelson reads from her notes.
O’Mara describes Dr. Di Maio’s testimony and the position of the gunshot to Martin as it is depicted in the animation.
Judge Nelson says the distinction with Pierce would be a demonstrative exhibit would not be evidence for the jury to consider, but only to assist an expert.
O’Mara says the court has already allowed the state to put together facts in a graphic way that supports their case.
Mantei argues the burden is on the defense to satisfy the court for the standards.
7:10 p.m.
Judge Nelson asks for the state’s position on the Daubert issue.
Mantei says he is asking for Frye and Daubert analysis.
O’Mara says for Frye he hasn’t seen a counter from the state. He says it has been in the courts and the witness has never been disqualified. He says he would acknowledge he did not present a lot of industry wide information, but the witness said he has been involved in the industry for 14 years and stays up to date.
O’Mara says for the Daubert inquiry, he thinks the court needs to be convinced it’s an accurate depiction of what happened based on information available.
He says some of it was based on trial testimony and within that context they took away some of the animation.
Judge Nelson asks for the testimony that Martin is left-handed because the animation showed a left-handed punch.
O’Mara says Zimmerman testified to it.
Judge Nelson says she doesn’t have any testimony about it.
O’Mara says Dr. Rao testified that the injury came across the nose from the right side of Zimmerman’s face. O’Mara says Fulton testified that her son was right-handed, but the medical evidence from Dr. Roa is that it came from the right side of Zimmerman’s face.
Judge Nelson asks if no can punch with their right hand.
O’Mara uses Mantei to demonstration how a right-handed punch would look. He says he thinks the testimony would suggest the more likely event was a left-handed throw.
7:02 p.m.
Schumaker says the figures are to scale.
Mantei asks if the animation shows the spacing.
Schumaker says it could be told from the video, but its not the purpose so he is looking for something that isn’t there.
He repeats the purpose of the video is to show relative positions of Martin on top where Dr. Di Maio said when the gun went off.
Mantei finishes questioning.
Schumaker is excused.
Judge Nelson asks for argument.
6:59 p.m.
Mantei asks about the movement of the position in relation to Zimmerman being able to reach for his gun inside his pants.
Schumaker says its common sense, but he didn’t hear Dr. Di Maio’s testimony.
“The gun had to be accessible, that’s common sense,” Schumaker says.
Mantei asks about position three and the depiction of the angles.
Schumaker says Dr. Di Maio mentioned 90 degrees but very slightly left to right.
Mantei asks if he only took one note from Dr. Di Maio or if he has any other notes.
Schumaker says just the one.
He says he didn’t portray a lot of the variables Mantei mentioned.
6:52 p.m.
Schumaker says the focus wasn’t on the reconstruction of the lighting but the detail of what was going on.
Schumaker says he added rain to the animation based on historical data he was given. Wind wasn’t added he says.
Schumaker says the software can be verified easily by measuring, which he has done with this animation.
He says he created the avatars for Zimmerman and Martin by adjusting things on them to match their size and clothing.
Schumaker says the height for Martin included the top of his hood and shoes, making him about 6 feet 2 inches tall.
He says another animation would have had to be created to show the gun, but it wasn’t the purpose because other people can testify to the
gunshot and its position.
The main thing, Schumaker says, was with Dr. Di Maio’s input that the person shot was on top and the person shooting was on the bottom.
O’Mara finishes questioning.
Mantei redirects.
He says in two positions the hips changed.
Schumaker says that was based on common sense.
6:45 p.m.
Judge Nelson asks when the consultation was with Good. She says Good was under sequestration as a witness.
Mantei says the state was not aware of the consultation.
O’Mara plays more of the animation.
Schumaker says he changed the animation to a still to eliminate random movements so as to show position according to Good.
O’Mara plays more of the animation. The position of the figures changes.
The third position was made in consultation with Dr. Di Maio.
Schumaker says a slope there also comes into play at that point.
O’Mara plays more of the animation.
Schumaker says it is just to show position.
O’Mara asks about the moment of the animation at the gunshot.
Schumaker says it is to show Martin leaning over Zimmerman.
O’Mara plays more of the animation to the “after shot position.” Schumaker says it is based on Zimmerman’s testimony and a Mora’s testimony.
A green circle shows the location of the marker of Martin in the Total Station data.
The viewpoint moves to that of Mora’s testimony. The screen goes back until Lauer’s call finishes.
O’Mara asks about the lighting conditions.
6:35 p.m.
Judge Nelson reads her notes about Good’s testimony and says her point is he didn’t give another time reference. There’s no knowledge of if the 8 to 10 seconds was as he was looking through the blinds or stepped out onto the patio.
O’Mara lists the times of the call and the gunshot.
Mantei says the court has hit of the problem
Judge Nelson says he doesn’t have a problem with other parts, but the overlay of the 911 call with the animation.
O’Mara says he would like to recall Mr. Good.
Judge Nelson says she’ll let O’Mara finish and then make her comments.
She asks O’Mara to finish with Schumaker.
6:29 p.m.
Mantei objects to a leading question.
Judge Nelson says she also has a question about Good calling 911 about the time of the gunshot and if it was used in the creation.
Schumaker says he used Good’s estimation from how long it took him to get up and make his call.
O’Mara asks if that would help calibrate the animation to be more refined.
Schumaker says he wouldn’t be able to re-render that animation but could do a marking to indicate it.
O’Mara points out would only change the audio track of Lauer’s call, not the actual animation.
Schumaker says it would affect the time Good went back into the condo.
O’Mara says he doesn’t want to miss an opportunity to inquire.
Judge Nelson points out the times Good mentioned in testimony.
She says she doesn’t know how long he was in the house before the gunshot and dialing 911, and the problem relating to it is the use of Lauer’s 911 call in conjunction with Good’s testimony.
6:22 p.m.
Schumaker says he used the arrow to show the direction the figures moved in to avoid creating anything not documented by witnesses.
He says the initial position came from Jon Good. The second position also came from Good.
The first event is the first visual Good had.
Schumaker says the approach of Martin is based on Zimmerman’s testimony. The confrontation is based on Zimmerman’s walk-through and multiple witness statements. The arrow shows the movement without the actual figures seen.
He says the Good’s position was modified after refinement he made in court and consultation with O’Mara and West.
The animation shows the viewpoint from Good’s back patio.
Lauer’s 911 call begins. Schumaker says he was able to relate Good’s testimony and Lauer’s call by the sound of the gunshot.
6:13 p.m.
O’Mara redirects starting with a question about the motion-capture suits.
Schumaker says the suit has been used to record someone skydiving before.
He says he has never waited until a trial is over to do an animation.
Schumaker says the consultations with O’Mara and West were based on court testimony.
He says he likes to start an animation as soon as he can ahead of trial.
Schumaker acknowledges the animation is an estimation.
6:02 p.m.
The animation is shown on the screen.
Schumaker says some of the initial portion from Zimmerman’s walk-through at the “T” intersection was used, but the witness statements were used for the rest.
He says it was used in conjunction with Lauer’s testimony.
Mantei asks about validation done for the software programs.
Schumaker says he didn’t find any inaccuracies in the software or measurements.
Mantei asks if he was directing the people’s movements.
Schumaker says yes.
Mantei asks if it is another estimation.
This is just portraying one person coming up and striking another, Schumaker says.
He says it is his reconstruction based on discovery, the motion capture-suit data, and fine-tuning it with consultation with the attorneys.
Schumaker confirms all the court testimony was “funneled” through the lawyers.
5:47 p.m.
Judge Nelson asks to interrupt. She says she saw it briefly on a computer, but it would be helpful to have it on the screen.
5:44 p.m.
Mantei asks about the second deposition and shows him a page from it.
Schumaker says it says in consultation with the attorney he left the gun out.
He says it was not the purpose of this video.
Mantei asks if the video omits the gun.
Schumaker says that is correct because it wasn’t the purpose.
Mantei asks about the conditions when the people in the suits were recorded and if they were moving in a rapid pace.
O’Mara objects that the video doesn’t show movement.
Schumaker says it wasn’t raining, the grass wasn’t wet and other physical items were out there.
He says he measured the areas from the drain boxes and the sprinkler boxes to get the correct position.
Schumaker says its best to record the action at the scene for better interaction.
He says they laid out markers.
Mantei asks about the shell casing’s proximity to the third location.
5:33 p.m.
Schumaker says he needed physical evidence of the positioning of the bodies when the shot went off.
He says he based it off his conversation with Dr. Di Maio.
He says the purpose of the final positioning is to show who is on top and on the bottom.
Schumaker says the animation depicts the position according to Dr. Di Maio’s findings.
He says he wasn’t showing bullet trajectory, so there was no rod used in the animation.
Schumaker says that wasn’t the purpose of the animation.
He says he doesn’t believe he was told to purposely leave the gun out of the animation.
5:25 p.m.
Schumaker explains that he could back track from the gunshot as to when Good went out and went back in.
Mantei says he wants to focus on the audio played over video based on nothing more than estimations.
“By the person who was witnessing it,” Schumaker responds.
“I don’t think it has to be specific to the exact word that she was saying,” he says in answer to Mantei’s question about exactness.
Schumaker says it is a scenario based on consultation with the attorneys.
“The purpose of him involved in the animation isn’t so much whether he was outside… Its putting him into the location and showing what he was able to see at that time,” Schumaker says.
Mantei asks about the portion of the animation that shows Good leave, but the figures can still be seen on the ground and what witness testimony is being relied on.
Schumaker says it is based on Zimmerman’s testimony.
5:18 p.m.
Mantei asks if the animation shows artificial light.
Schumaker says that is correct.
He says the most important thing on the video is seeing detail.
Other people can testify to the lighting conditions, Schumaker adds.
He says it was prior to the trial, but based on police reports and interviews for placement of the people.
He says he read three handwritten witness statements.
Mantei asks about the use of Lauer’s 911 call, but the showing of actions of everyone else.
Mantei asks if he was told Good stated where he was during Lauer’s 911 call.
Schumaker says there was no in court testimony about it, but he consulted with the attorneys.
5:10 p.m.
Schumaker says the animation was adjusted to testimony in court, but he didn’t hear it or observe it himself.
Mantei says part of the animation shows Martin and Zimmerman approach each other, but no one jumps out of a bush.
“There was no evidence,” Schumaker says.
Mantei points out the plotting of various items like the flashlight and the sprinkler boxes, but the animation zooms with an arrow to a place 40 feet away showing the figures bound up together.
Schumaker says that shows the movement based on reports and the trail of evidence.
He says the arrow moves them from one witnessed event to the next witnessed event.
Mantei asks how tall Jon Good is.
Schumaker says he is 6-foot-tall based on information he received from the attorneys.
5:04 p.m.
Schumaker explains the accelerometers on the suit and the signal they send to his laptop.
He says there were two prior versions adjusted for more accuracy according to the witnesses.
He did not see courtroom testimony.
Mantei asks if he adjusted them based on what Zimmerman’s attorneys told him was said in court.
“Yes,” he says.
Schumaker says he takes coroner’s reports, discovery, specifics at the scene, Total Station data and his findings of the scene to put it into context.
Mantei asks which testimony was incorporated into the animation.
Schumaker mentions Jeremy Weinberg.
He says Lauer’s, Good’s and Mora’s testimony was used.
Judge Nelson says it must be trial testimony or evidence incorporated into the animation.
Schumaker says it was Lauer’s testimony.
Mantei asks about the visual depiction because Lauer only heard what happened.
The court tries to track down a noisy vibrating phone.
4:56 p.m.
Mantei asks Schumaker if he ever had to use the suit to capture a physical fight between two people for a court case before a jury.
Schumaker names a Greenburg case and says he had to determine the position of two people involved in a shooting.
Mantei says he wants to focus on testimony before a court.
Schumaker says the suit he used has been accepted into court in two other cases.
This is the first one with close contact, he says.
Mantei asks about his company being the only one to use the suit for reconstruction purposes.
Schumaker says there are a limited number of them.
He says the suit was calibrated at the factory and he calibrates it when he uses it.
Schumaker says height for the person wearing the suit is not that important to match the victim.
Mantei asks if he knew the person’s height and weight.
Schumaker says it wasn’t relevant, but they were similar stature to the people he was trying to represent.
Mantei asks about the length of their arms and legs.
Schumaker says he didn’t measure their arms.
4:46 p.m.
Mantei begins cross examining Daniel Schumaker as part of a Daubert hearing for admission of animation evidence.
4:21 p.m.
The jury is dismissed for the evening. The court will recess for 10 minutes and then they will take up the animation issue.
Court will be back at 8 a.m. to address issues with witness Donnelly.
Witness: Eloise Dilligard - Resident at Retreat at Twin Lakes
4:15 p.m.
De la Rionda asks if she ever heard Martin’s voice.
She says that is correct she never heard his voice.
Dilligard is excused.
Judge Nelson asks the attorneys to approach.
4:14 p.m.
The video connection was lost, but reconnected.
Dilligard explains how she drove to the area to get a better view of the crime scene.
She says the truck was parked on Retreat View Circle just to the left of the “T” area.
O’Mara finishes questioning.
De la Rionda begins cross examining.
4:08 p.m.
Dilligard says she went back to the crime scene to see if Shellie was OK, but didn’t see her.
She says she gave an officer her name and phone number.
She gave statement to law enforcement after an FBI agent left a card on her door. She says he and another agent interviewed her at her house.
Dilligard says she heard the 911 call with the screams in the background first on a local news channel.
She has listened to it two or three times.
She says she heard the voice screaming in the background and has only heard Zimmerman talk.
She says she thinks it is Zimmerman’s voice.
She says he has a light male voice.
O’Mara holds a picture over the iPad to show her and have her identify where she saw Zimmerman’s truck.
O’Mara says it won’t work and he will move on.
3:55 p.m.
She says she was shown a second picture but did not know the person’s name, but had seen him in passing possibly earlier that day.
She knows now that person was Trayvon Martin.
She says her first concern was where Zimmerman’s wife was.
She says she went to her house and knocked on Zimmerman’s house next door.
De la Rionda objects to Dilligard sharing what Shellie, Zimmerman’s wife said.
O’Mara asks to be heard at the bench.
3:52 p.m.
She says she was returning to the neighborhood as police were pulling in. Dilligard says she saw crime scene tape being put up and went the back way to her house and asked some guys what was going on, and then she went toward the crime scene area.
She says it was very rainy that night.
She says she saw Zimmerman’s truck.
O’Mara asks her to describe the area the truck was located in.
She says she saw quite a few people standing on the sidewalk. She says she looked around to see if she saw Zimmerman because she saw his truck.
She says he asks a woman she recognized from an HOA meeting about what happened.
De la Rionda objects to hearsay.
Dilligard says she only asked what was going on.
She says she didn’t see Zimmerman and attempted to talk to other residents there, but as she was walking away a police officer said “You don’t want to talk to me.”
She says she didn’t know what she could tell him, but he said he was trying to identify the person involved.
The officer said he was going to take a picture to see if they recognized the victim or the other person.
She says he came back with two pictures.
Other people were present, a man and a married couple. She doesn’t remember their names.
She says she identified Zimmerman. The picture showed he had a bloody nose, she says.
Dilligard says his nose was bloody and looked disfigured.
3:41 p.m.
The defense calls Eloise Dilligard. She lived at Retreat at Twin Lakes.
3:38 p.m.
The jury is reseated.
3:31 p.m.
Court is back on the record. O'Mara says they are waiting for the video conferencing to be set up.
3:11 p.m.
Judge Nelson grants a 15 minutes recess.
Witness: Norton Bonaparte - Sanford City Manager
3:09 p.m.
Bonaparte says the recording was being released to the media and let the family hear it first.
O’Mara asks for a yes or no answer to a question if there was a consideration to record the event.
“I’m sorry sir. I don’t mean to banter with you. My question was fairly specific as to whether or not you gave any consideration to the concept of recording it so that if law enforcement or anyone else in the future needed it, it would be recorded, that event of the first time half a dozen family members listened to that tape was recorded at all. Is that a yes or a no?”
Bonaparte says no.
O’Mara finishes questioning.
De la Rionda cross examines.
“The bottom line was that it was the decent thing to do to play it for the family before it was released to the public?” De la Rionda asks.
Bonapart confirms.
Bonaparte is excused.
O’Mara asks to approach for an issue about the questioning for the next witness.
The attorneys enter a sidebar.
3:06 p.m.
O’Mara asks about the playing of the 911 call for the Martin family.
Bonaparte says the decision was made to play a number of tapes for the family.
He says he and the mayor did the playing of the tapes.
He says at that “point they weren’t witnesses they were parents.”
Bonaparte says the decision was made to make the recordings public and play it for the family first as a courtesy.
He says the decision was made to allow them to hear them.
O’Mara asks about the entire family being in one room to hear the tapes.
Bonaparte confirms.
He says they used a disk in a laptop to play them.
He says the mayor, Martin family, and attorneys were present. Law enforcement was not present.
He says he asked the family who said they would rather not have law enforcement there.
He says he informed the chief and other officers to not be in the same room.
Bonaparte doesn’t remember how many times it was played. He says the tape with the screams was played more than once at the request of the family, but he doesn’t remember who.
2:59 p.m.
The defense calls Sanford City Manager Norton Bonaparte. De la Rionda asks to approach for a brief sidebar.
Witness: Dr. Vincent Di Maio - Expert on gunshot wounds
2:58 p.m.
West shows the pictures to Dr. Di Maio and asks if there is a difference.
West asks if it looked like someone cleaned it.
West finishes questioning.
De la Rionda asks if the sweatshirt might’ve absorbed the blood.
Dr. Di Maio says it could.
De la Rionda asks if West testifying is evidence.
Dr. Di Maio confirms.
He agrees there was absence of a concussion and brain bleeding, and proof the body was washed.
Dr. Di Maio says the clothing should remain on the body, but when they got to the ME’s office, they shouldn’t have undressed the body before taking pictures.
“The techniques weren’t exactly correct, let’s put it that way,” he says.
De la Rionda asks if there was evidence that anything was washed away by the rain and an absence of vomiting.
De la Rionda asks about Jon Good’s testimony that he didn’t see or hear blows landing.
Dr. Di Maio says he disregarded the witnesses because he was trying to see if the physical evidence supported or invalidated Zimmerman’s statements.
“The witnesses are all over the place. You can’t use the witnesses to make autopsy decisions,” he says.
De la Rionda finishes questioning.
West re-redirects.
He asks about Jon Good not testifying to hearing Zimmerman’s head hit cement or hearing Martin hit Zimmerman in the head.
Dr. Di Maio is excused.
2:48 p.m.
West asks about De la Rionda’s question of Martin putting his hand over Zimmerman’s nose as seen in the enlarged photo.
Dr. Di Maio confirms he doesn’t know when Zimmerman’s nose was bleeding.
“Absence doesn’t mean anything, presence does,” Dr. Di Maio says.
Dr. Di Maio says environmental conditions can affect the presence of DNA.
West asks about the hands being washed prior to being photographed.
Dr. Di Maio says a pathologist should always be with the body.
West shows a picture of Martin’s chest taken at the crime scene and another at the time of the autopsy.
De la Rionda objects. Judge Nelson asks them to approach for a sidebar.
2:41 p.m.
West asks about tree branches that could’ve been used as a club.
Dr. Di Maio says there were only tree trunks and the person would have to be upright.
He says he reviewed Folgate’s notes from the next day.
West asks about the black eyes.
Dr. Di Maio says secondary blackening of the eye shows up later.
Dr. Di Maio explains again why he thinks the nose had a displaced fracture and was put back into place.
“He’s obviously been punched in the nose and hit in the forehead,” he says.
West asks if being punched in the nose would hurt.
Dr. Di Maio confirms, he says a person is stunned or in fear and thinks they are all right, but they can later die.
“The police in this case should have taken Mr. Zimmerman to the hospital,” Dr. Di Maio says, adding that is because of the head injuries.
West asks if the circumstances of the trauma can be overwhelming.
De la Rionda objects. Judge Nelson overrules.
Dr. Di Maio says yes.
West asks about the packaging of the evidence and the outer sweatshirt being put in a sealed plastic bag being consistent with good evidence handling.
Dr. Di Maio says no.
He explains again it should be air dried and put in paper.
2:30 p.m.
West asks if Dr. Di Maio would have indicated the location of Martin’s wound in his notes.
Dr. Di Maio says he doesn’t need his notes to tell his opinion.
West asks about the scope of his work and the consistency of Zimmerman’s statement the moment the shot was fired.
Dr. Di Maio confirms.
He says he will not base his opinion on witnesses because witnesses are wrong all the time.
West asks about Selene Bahadoor’s testimony.
Dr. Di Maio says it would not matter.
West asks about Jayne Surdyka’s testimony.
Dr. Di Maio says it would not have an impact on his opinion.
West asks about Jon Good’s testimony. Dr. Di Maio says it is consistent with the evidence, but he would not use it to give his opinion, only the physical evidence.
2:22 p.m.
Dr. Di Maio says Zimmerman could’ve have put his nose back in place, but anyone could’ve done it.
He says the swelling shouldn’t have gone down in four hours.
De la Rionda asks about bleeding on the head.
Dr. Di Maio says scalp bleeding is always profuse because there are more blood vessels in the head.
De la Rionda asks about the gun being out.
Dr. Di Maio says he can only say the shot was consistent with Zimmerman’s account and also consistent with Martin pulling back like De la Rionda described.
He says he doesn’t testify to treatment for injuries.
De la Rionda asks if he is aware of sprinkler boxes at the scene.
Dr. Di Maio says he didn’t see them.
He says Zimmerman is right handed.
De la Rionda finishes questioning.
West redirects.
2:15 p.m.
The lacerations are indicative of a hard impact, he says.
Dr. Di Maio says the bleeding continued after he was seen by EMS or they didn’t notice it of consider it significant.
De la Rionda asks about Folgate’s observations.
Dr. Di Maio says medical personnel don’t ascribe injuries properly, but it’s nothing against them because their job is to treat people.
De la Rionda asks if he put his hand over Zimmerman’s nose if he would have blood on it.
Dr. Di Maio confirms.
De la Rionda asks about where the blood would go if he was lying down.
Dr. Di Maio says he did see the video of Zimmerman walking in the police station on TV.
He confirms the only other witness to the actual shooting was Zimmerman and Martin.
De la Rionda asks him about the gunshot distance.
Dr. Di Maio says he is talking about the distance from the skin to the muzzle.
He confirms most people wear them big.
De la Rionda asks if would hang down with something heavy in it.
Dr. Di Maio confirms.
De la Rionda asks about the proper packaging and use of plastic for wet evidence.
Dr. Di Maio says the item should be dried and packaged separately and not put in plastic.
2:07 p.m.
Dr. Di Maio says the marks on Zimmerman’s forehead were contusions. He says he had impact abrasions on the sides of his head and one on his nose.
De la Rionda asks if a tree branch could cause any of those.
Dr. Di Maio says if someone is hit hard enough it could be a laceration, but wood gives.
De la Rionda shows a photo of the trees at the crime scene and asks if it’s possible they could be responsible for some of the injuries.
He asks if the injuries could be from rolling around as they both struggled.
De la Rionda asks about the abrasion to the left fingers of Martin’s hand.
Dr. Di Maio says if they suspected bruising they should have made a cut to examine the hands.
He says it’s possible to not have bruises from punching someone.
Dr. Di Maio says emergency room and doctor’s records are generally lousy.
He says doctors aren’t interested in the injuries, but more so in treating the person.
De la Rionda mentions the measurements taken by Folgate.
He shows the enlarged photo of Zimmerman with a bloody nose. He asks about the possibility of a fracture.
Dr. Di Maio says the swelling should have still been there in later photos if the nose wasn’t fractured.
1:54 p.m.
De la Rionda asks about the Zimmerman statement from the reenactment and his own self-interest or bias.
Dr. Di Maio says he was aware of Zimmerman had a flashlight.
De la Rionda shows him the flashlight.
Dr. Di Maio says he wouldn’t consider it a dangerous weapon that would cause significant injury.
He says he wasn’t provided Bahadoor’s statement.
De la Rionda asks about an experiment done involving shooting animals.
Dr. Di Maio says it was done with federal regulations.
He says he testified for the defense in the Drew Peterson and Spector cases.
He charges $400 an hour and has charged $2,400 up to yesterday.
He has notes with him to help with his testimony.
He says he viewed the autopsy report and his opinion is in part based on Dr. Bao’s findings.
De la Rionda asks about what would happen if his heart was removed.
Dr. Di Maio confirms the minimum would be between 10-15 seconds depending on the oxygen supply in the head.
“You would still feel pain,” he says.
He cannot say who was yelling for help or about one of the statements that Zimmerman said about pulling the gun from his holster.
“You can’t tell that by any scientific method,” he says about Zimmerman’s statement of pulling the gun from the holster.
De la Rionda demonstrates with a pen and his hand about Martin being over the top of Zimmerman.
Dr. Di Maio says he can’t say, except that its consistent Martin was over him.
He says the problem with them standing is the damage down to the shirts.
1:40 p.m.
Dr. Di Maio confirms he cannot say it was Martin or Zimmerman defending themselves.
His testimony is only focusing at the time of the gunshot, he says.
De la Rionda asks if he was aware the defendant gave multiple statements before the reenactment.
Dr. Di Maio says essentially, Zimmerman is holding to that account.
De la Rionda asks about the first statement.
Dr. Di Maio says the first one is usually more accurate than one weeks later.
He says in most cases he would want to know what all the witnesses said, and in this case, he focused on Zimmerman’s statement and if it was consistent with his findings.
De la Rionda mentions there was another person being there and points out that person can’t speak because he’s dead.
De la rionda asks if Dr. Di Maio knew Martin was on the phone. Dr. Di Maio says he did not look at her statement.
He says looking at all the statements goes toward the manner of death, but in this case that is not in question and not important for him to give his opinion.
“The other statements are for the jury to evaluate, not for me,” Dr. Di Maio says.
1:33 p.m.
Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda begins cross examination.
Break for lunch
1:33 p.m.
The attorneys are in sidebar with Judge Nelson. The jury is reseated.
12:33 p.m.
Judge Nelson dismisses the jury for lunch until 1:30 p.m.
Witness: Dr. Vincent Di Maio - Expert on gunshot wounds
12:31 p.m.
Dr. Di Maio points out red marks on Zimmerman’s forehead he says are more consistent with a punch.
“I think you have six identifiable injuries,” he says, listing the two lacerations, nose, marks on the forehead, and two areas of swelling on the head.
West asks if a person resisting a fight situation might try to sit up. West asks if other injuries might be possible but not show because of the resisting.
“All I can say is there was definite evidence of six impacts,” Dr. Di Maio says.
West finishes questioning.
De la Rionda asks to approach. The attorneys enter a sidebar.
12:26 p.m.
Dr. Di Maio says the laceration is a marker of force. “It indicates you’ve had severe force, it’s not like you just bumped your head,” he says.
He says severe trauma to the head is possible without external injury.
He says stunning is not incapacitating.
West asks about punctate abrasions.
Dr. Di Maio says a surface with an edge to it would be required to create those injuries.
He points out a “knot” on Zimmerman’s head, which he says is associated with the punctate abrasions.
He points out more injuries on different photos.
West asks about the photo showing Zimmerman with a bloody nose.
Dr. Di Maio points out the injuries to the nose on a enlarged print photo.
He says the nose is consistent with a possible displace fracture.
He says it’s consistent with being punched in the nose.
West shows the photo taken of Zimmerman at the police station.
Dr. Di Maio says the swelling appears to be gone, suggesting that he had a displaced fracture and they pushed it back in.
12:11 p.m.
He says it’s not a medical term, but the best word to describe it is stunned when the head is hit.
West asks him about lacerations to the scalp.
West shows photographs taken of Zimmerman’s head.
Dr. Di Maio points out injuries and swelling on the head.
“You know there are two separate impacts,” he says, pointing out the two lacerations.
He says a laceration can be cause by perpendicular impact causing a tear or a hit at an angle that slides against the surface causing a tear.
12:03 p.m.
Dr. Di Maio says Martin could have moved his arms.
He says he agrees with Dr. Bao’s conclusion of an abrasion on Martin’s fingers.
He says it is consistent with contact with a hard surface.
Dr. Di Maio says bruising depends on what part of the body is punched.
He says there may or may not have been bruising, but it wouldn’t make much difference.
Once the blood pressure goes, he says bruising is not possible.
Dr. Di Maio says proper examination would have been to cut the area to look for damage.
West asks about the injuries Zimmerman had.
Dr. Di Maio confirms he was provided the photographs.
He says when the head is impacted, the brain, which is like gelatin, shifts. He says that creates bruising or bleeding.
The other type of brain injury is called axonal. He says when the brain moves, the axons stretch. If the movement is violent, they stretch causing injury to the wall. Mild movement is repaired by the axon, he says.
He says the force in an automobile accident is so great the axons cannot be repaired. He says impacts of the head on a hard surface can create intracranial bleeding.
He says concrete doesn’t yield.
11:53 a.m.
Dr. Di Maio says the ability to move is determined by the amount of oxygen in the brain in reserve, which is 10 to 15 seconds at minimum.
He says some people immediately collapse and others don’t know they’ve been shot.
With a through-and-through hole of the ventricle of the heart and a hole in the lung, he says blood is being lost.
He says the heart rate increases when involved in a struggle. He says if Martin lost a tablespoon of blood every time the heart beats, it would be about a quarter of his blood supply in one minute.
Assuming those conditions, he would be dead in one to three minutes after being shot, Dr. Di Maio says.
Dr. Di Maio says he has seen cases where someone with similar injuries could talk and move, describing one man that ran 65 feet before collapsing.
11:46 a.m.
Dr. Di Maio says he is aware Zimmerman said Martin was straddling him and he had his gun in his right hand.
He says the medical evidence is consistent with Zimmerman’s statement because the simplest thing is the gun being in his right hand.
“The most important point is the nature of the defect in the clothing and the powder tattooing,” he says, adding that when someone leans over the clothing sits away from the chest.
He says it is consistent with someone leaning over and their clothes being two to four inches away.
Dr. Di Maio says wet clothing is heavier and something in the front would pull it away from the body.
He says the wound’s gap and powder tattooing indicates consistency with Zimmerman’s account that Martin was over him leaning forward at the time he was shot.
11:41 a.m.
He says he has done a lot of research on powder tattooing.
He says it is similar to the spraying of a hose and the water spreading out from it.
Dr. Di Maio says the clothing didn’t filter out the powder because there was a hole there.
West asks if the muzzle was pressed against Martin what would be different.
Dr. Di Maio says the wound would have a halo of black soot.
“This is basic 101,” he says about the difficulty in his conclusion.
West asks about the path of the bullet.
Dr. Di Maio says the autopsy describes a bullet hole in the left chest, then went through the ribs, hit the sac surrounding the heart, and went through the right ventricle of the heart and the right lung.
He says the lead core of the bullet and jacket fragments can be seen.
There’s some left-to-right trajectory, he confirms.
The shot doesn’t appear to be straight-on, he says.
11:31 a.m.
Dr. Di Maio says the photographs show a contact discharge of a weapon against the clothing. At the time of discharge the gun was against the clothing, the gas tore the clothing, soot deposited all around it, he says.
He says the wound in the chest shows a different picture.
He describes the area of powder tattooing, or marks on the skin from powder rings of the gun.
He says the powder tattoo marks indicate powder hit the skin and the person was alive at the time.
He says it indicated the gun was not against the skin by more than an inch. He says the muzzle of the gun was two to four inches away from the skin, based on the marks.
“The clothing itself had to be two to four inches away from the body at the time Mr. Martin was shot,” Dr. Di Maio says.
Dr. Di Maio shows a photo of the gunshot wound to the jury and points out the marks showing the powder tattoo marks.
The first time powder tattoo marks are seen when the muzzle is a half inch away. He says the area of tattooing gets bigger the farther away the gun is.
11:25 a.m.
Dr. Di Maio lists evidence in the case he reviewed.
He says he did have the opportunity of Zimmerman reenacting the shooting for police.
Dr. Di Maio says the nature of the case is more about determining if the physical evidence is consistent with Zimmerman’s account.
He says witness statements vary greatly and the easiest way is to evaluated the physical evidence and compare it with Zimmerman’s statements.
He says the most important things are the autopsy report, including the photos of the wound, and the reports by the firearms examiner.
Secondary are the photos of the scene.
He calls the firearms examiner’s report excellent.
West asks Dr. Di Maio’s opinion on how long Martin might’ve been alive and conscious.
Dr. Di Maio says they would be different for alive and for conscious.
He says he had access to photos taken by the Sanford Police Department.
West asks about the gunshot and the mechanics involved.
11:16 a.m.
West hands him a copy of his curriculum vitae.
De la Rionda objects to the submission of the exhibit.
The attorneys approach for a sidebar.
11:14 a.m.
West asks about the gas that comes out of the gun first.
Dr. Di Maio says it is like a column of gas and air being pushed straight ahead that tears a hole in the clothing, and then the bullet gets to the clothing, and then the soot follows.
Dr. Di Maio says a gun with a blank cartridge could still kill someone in a contact wound.
He has written about head trauma. He is a chief editor for a journal.
He testified for the U.S. Attorney’s Office about a police shooting in New Orleans.
He also testified for the Marine Corps in the prosecution of someone charged with war crimes.
He says he also testified for the British Government and United Nations.
He says he has testified in most states, along with Canada, South Africa, Israel, and more.
He has also received multiple awards.
11:07 a.m.
Dr. Di Maio describes his work doing autopsies.
He worked as a consultant outside the medical examiner’s office he worked for in mostly civil cases.
He has been in private practice since January 2007.
He says he started his firearms research while in the military.
Dr. Di Maio explains microflash as something very quick to capture fast moving objects.
He explains what happens when a gun is fired.
10:58 a.m.
West asks Dr. Di Maio how wet materials should be packaged.
Dr. Di Maio says it must be dried out and packaged in paper. He says the bacteria begins multiplying in plastic and leads to mold.
“That’s standard practice,” he says.
He says most lab problems are reported by the lab itself.
Dr. Di Maio describes his academic positions.
He has published four books, multiple articles and book chapters.
His first book was “Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques.
A third edition is due at the publishers in a week.
He says the book instructs about firearms and wound.
Range and nature of the weapon can be determined by the wound, he says.
Dr. Di Maio says he was solicited to write chapters in the other books.
10:42 a.m.
Dr. Di Maio takes the stand and describes his work and education history.
10:40 a.m.
The jury is seated. Judge Nelson checks to make sure they have not seen reports about the case or researched. it.
The defense calls Vincent Di Maio.
10:38 a.m.
Judge Nelson checks with George Zimmerman about the testimony of Dr. Di Maio.
Defense attorney asks for the physical exhibits to be brought into the courtroom.
Judge Nelson asks for the jury to be brought in.
Evidence hearing
10:28 a.m.
Mantei says he needs 45 minutes to question Schumaker.
Judge Nelson says the hearing will continue later.
She asks for the defense’s next witness. The defense asks for a moment at the bench.
O'Mara begins talking with Zimmermand at the defense table.
10:17 a.m.
He says he didn’t try to reconstruct the lighting because it is more important to show the information.
Schumaker confirms he has been doing this type of work for 13 years.
He says he is the only one with a wireless motion capture suit.
ARAS 360 is one of two standard software programs used in law enforcement, Schumaker says.
O’Mara finishes questioning.
Judge Nelson grants a five minute recess.
10:07 a.m.
O'Mara has Schumaker go over the still images at the bench.
10:00 a.m.
Schumaker says volunteers from O’Mara’s law office put the suits on.
He says he used audio from the 911 call to time them with the shot of the gun.
Jon Good and Selma Mora’s testimony was used, also.
He says Jenna Lauer’s police report statement was also used.
The still posters have been adjusted to match trial testimony, he confirms.
He says he had everything needed to create the scene.
Schumaker shows the animation at the bench.
9:52 a.m.
He has never testified in civil court.
Schumaker says he first became involved with a conversation in August 2012, but the first meeting was in April.
He says he was to do a reconstruction of the scene with the information and create an animated timeline.
He says there is not a lot of opportunity to have audio in the creation, which he says helped with the timeline.
Schumaker says the discovery was used, including photos, witness statements and Total Station data.
He made two visits to the scene, he says.
He used the motion capture suit during the second week of May.
He says there were seven points that were labeled as windows, but weren’t in the right position.
He says a measurement of a second story window actually measured some tree branches instead.
He says he used Matterport scanner at the scene to take photos and infrared photos for distance purposes.
He says it helped capture slope and positioning.
9:44 a.m.
He lists the California counties where his reports have been used.
He has never testified out of California.
He says sometimes another expert will testify about what he creates. He just speaks to the accuracy of the creation.
He says all the trials he has testified in have been criminal.
Four months ago, he says he testified about a shooting reconstruction.
He describes another case where he was able to determine the position of someone shot three times in a car.
He says he testified in one case about a person inside a house threatening suicide and he had to determine which responding officer fired a shot and the position of the person.
He describes what he was able to show.
He says he has never failed to be qualified as an expert.
9:35 a.m.
Schumaker says there was more “total station data” from the district attorney’s office. Total Station is the equipment used.
He says is certified by the software company.
He describes 3-D software which uses Total Station data.
Schumaker explains how he determined movement for a man shot in his car.
He says bullet trajectory and physical characteristics of inside of truck are looked at to make the animation.
Schumaker explains how he can determine measurements relative to other distances.
He says the motion suit was also used in the movies “Avatar,” “Ironman,” and “X-Men” and other video games.
He acquired the suit in 2008 and has used if for most cases since, which he says is about 20.
He says he has worked in 59 criminal cases, plus 21 civil cases, and testified in 20 of them.
He has worked with the Dept. of Justice in police officer-involved shootings.
He has always worked for the defense, but says some it has to do with the defense of police officers in officer-involved shootings.
9:10 a.m.
Schumaker says he has a motion capture suit that can help determine movements at a crime scene.
He says his suit can measures with accelerometers as he moves, which gives a log of all movements.
Schumaker describes how he used the suit to do a recreation of a man being pulled from a car.
He shows an example animation on his laptop at the judge’s bench.
8:53 a.m.
Mr. Schumaker describes his work and education background.
8:48 a.m.
O’Mara begins questioning Mr. Daniel Schumaker, who works for Contrast Forensics.
8:46 a.m.
O’Mara responds.
He says the medical examiner says the gunshot was a 90 degree angle. He says he is withdrawing a still the state seems to have a concern over.
O’Mara says that leaves the underlying fact and the concern of the position of the bodies.
He says what’s known is the angle of the gunshot, but what isn’t known is the position of the bodies.
O’Mara demonstrates with his hands how the angles could change and mentions Jon Good’s testimony as the only eye witness.
O’Mara says he doesn’t understand the concern when it is known animations are often used in criminal cases based on facts of the trial.
He says it is specifically in line with the facts of the evidence and supports their theory of what happened.
O’Mara says he’s not certain about the true objection. He says the animation is based on the 90 degree angle.
He says it is more than an animation, but is a series of stills.
O’Mara says movement of the arms was removed.
Judge Nelson says the defense should call their first witness.
8:36 a.m.
Mantei says he has supplemented his motion this morning. He says the reason is the animation is to fit the witness’s theory and the state now believes there is a Daubert issue.
He says it is an animated depiction of the theory Dr. Di Maio discussed with the witness Saturday.
He says the hearing needs to be expanded to include Daubert issues and they need to fleshed out based on the changes.
Mantei says during last night’s deposition the witness indicated he had additional materials prepared.
O’Mara speaks to Mantei.
8:15 a.m.
Judge Nelson will hear arguments from the prosecution and defense over a new animation being submitted as evidence.