I thought it odd that there was so little evidence introduced about the background of either the defendant or the deceased. Because the defense argued self defense, I really thought it had the right to explore both the motive and the means of Trayvon Martin to commit the assault. There definitely was evidence which the judge did not allow. Also, there was very little testimony about Zimmerman's character, which went to both motive and state of mind. It was obvious from news reports that the defense could have produced a lot of positive testimony.
Last edited:
