The firearms and ballistics evidence in this case was very important, one reason why the Kel-Tec PF9 9mm death weapon was first and foremost in the minds of journalists reporting on Eric Holder’s recent decision to have all evidence in this case held pending Federal investigation (again).  One of the area newspapers reported in March that the death weapon was found with a spent casing still in the chamber. This would have been consistent with someone’s hand grabbing the gun and retarding the slide mechanism at the moment of the shot, and I surmised as much in the one blog entry I made on it at that time, prior to being contacted by the then-defense team and confidentiality issues kicking in from then on.

It turned out that this was not the case. The officers who recovered the evidence unloaded the death weapon. The spent casing from the one shot fired in the incident was recovered from the ground on which it had ejected, and another live round was ejected from the firing chamber after the officer removed the magazine. All eight cartridges, the gun’s full capacity, were accounted for. The pistol had functioned normally, as designed.

Prosecutor John Guy, in his dramatic opening statement, made a big deal out of the fact that Zimmerman carried the Kel-Tec with a live round in the chamber, as if this implied malice and a man looking to kill someone. Over in CNN Headline News Land, Nancy Grace took up the same cry.  Zimmerman’s after-the-assault attackers even made a big deal out of the fact that he had a pistol with no dedicated manual safety.  Ms. Grace claimed that he carried it with the safety off, and when a friend of Zimmerman’s was on her show and told her the gun HAD NO safety catch per se,  she yelled at him that he was wrong, she knew all about Kel-Tec PF9s, and implied that Zimmerman must have flicked the safety off beforehand. (Premeditation, don’t cha know?)

Of course, the PF9 pistol DOESN’T have a safety catch. Ms. Grace apparently Googled “Kel-Tec PF9” and mistook the slide lock lever for a safety lever. Did any of you folks ever hear her apologize to Zimmerman’s friend, who was right when she was wrong?  Let me know, ‘cause I must have missed it if she did.

For perspective, very few American police officers carry guns with manual safety levers. The most popular police pistols don’t have them, including the Glock and the SIG, the two most widely used. The Smith & Wesson Military & Police has an optional ambidextrous thumb safety, but most police departments order those guns without that feature, and the same is true for the majority of defensive pistols bought these days by America’s armed citizens. The old style service revolver didn’t come with a safety either.

Like those revolvers, semiautomatics such as the Kel-Tec are normally carried ready to fire with a simple pull of the trigger, i.e., with a round chambered.

Another element I warned O’Mara and West about back in second quarter 2012 was that they could expect the prosecution to attribute malice to Zimmerman for loading with hollow points. Such ammunition is standard in virtually every police department in our nation, and is the overwhelming (and logical) choice of armed citizens. The expanding bullet is less likely to ricochet, and it is more likely to stop inside the body of the offender instead of passing through to strike an unseen bystander.  It also, historically, stops gunfights faster, saving the lives endangered by the attacker who had to be shot. Finally, for that latter reason, it reduces the number of wounds the offender must suffer before he stops forcing good people to shoot him. Except for the ricochet factor, all of those elements were present in the Zimmerman>Martin shooting.  The prosecution didn’t harp on this as much as I expected, but prosecutor Richard Mantei did bring it up: http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/george-zimmerman-hollow-points-and-reality/ .

Fortunately, the defense covered this superbly. They did so with the testimony of material witness Mark Osterman, the Federal Air Marshal who trained Zimmerman, told him to get a double action only pistol with no manual safety and carry it with a round in the chamber. His personal knowledge carried more weight than any outside expert could ever have brought to the game, but defense expert Dennis Root did a good job of batting clean-up and filling in other points.  Together, they tanked the bogus allegations of the prosecution in this case insofar as guns, ammunition, and malice or premeditation that could be ascribed to either.

The take-away is not to avoid such unmeritorious courtroom attacks by carrying a .25 auto with an empty chamber. The take-away is, be able to logically explain your choice of gun and method of carry.  The defense did exactly this, to their credit.

This case, of course, was about much more than guns, and we’ll continue with that in the next entry.

1 COMMENT

  1. Mas, let’s just ask a totally hypothetical case here: Let’s say a person in Florida who is legally engaging in licensed concealed carry is driving home from work one dark, drizzley night and enters his neighborhood. He sees a person he doesn’t know walking idly along the street in a manner which seems odd for that time and place. The person isn’t obviously doing anything illegal. Being a member of the neighborhood take-a-bite-out-of-crime Crime Watch, he’s been told that the police want citizens to report anything that looks odd or out of place, so he pulls over and calls 911 on his cell. The dispatcher says they’ll send someone out and he says he’ll wait for them in his car. The call ends and the person prepares to sit and watch and wait for the police. The suspect has seen him pull over and sit there and watch him and has stopped wandering and been watching him. After a few seconds of the two watching one another, the walker turns and takes off at a run down a public sidewalk between two rows of houses where there is no alley or road. The person in the car will lose sight of the runner almost immediately if he doesn’t get out of his car and follow him. Should he?

  2. So with the knowledge that George’s gun was loaded ready to fire a second shot, it proves that George chose not too, as he must have felt it wasn’t needed to stop the threat to his well being. Again providing even more to the logical assumption that George’s intent was to only stop the attack against his person.

  3. I also noticed that they really tried to make hay out of the fact that Trayvon was shot in the heart… once again, using this as “proof” of Zimmerman’s murderous intent.

  4. “Prosecutor John Guy, in his dramatic opening statement, made a big deal out of the fact that Zimmerman carried the Kel-Tec with a live round in the chamber, as if this implied malice and a man looking to kill someone.”

    I had a neighbor approach me while I was reading on my front porch the other day and ask “Isn’t it true that it takes two hands to cock an automatic before you can shoot it? Like…?” …and mimed racking the slide on an auto like a Hollywood detective stacked outside a suspect’s door.

    I was fortunately able to clear that misperception up for him and point out that not even Officer Friendly carries his pistol that way, since it turns a handgun into a handsgun.

  5. I’m enjoying watching you finally come out swinging after having had to use restraint until the verdict was out, Mr. Ayoob! Your logic is impregnable.
    And it’s amazing how much gun misinformation will be thrown at someone to see what might stick. Truly shameless/unethical behavior on the part of the prosecution team and most media types. Having absorbed In The Gravest Extreme long ago and living in California, I’m not that surprised, of course. But the counter-measures are what we really need to focus on and this entry is a great help.

  8. Mas, the phrase “a text book example” comes to mind. I would think that this case could be the focus of an edited text. An anatomy, so to say, of a murder case. Experts such as yourself, Dr. Di Maio, possibly the legal team, all contributing chapters or more on their area of expertise/perspective of the case. I would think that it could read like a John Grisham novel. Hell if you haven’t been contacted by your agent already, he must be sleeping on the job !

    P.S. since its my idea, if it happens, I get a freebie to one of your classes as fee 🙂

  9. I am suprised with the widespread usage of hollowpoints that prosecuters still try to bring up such a debunked argument. Just goes to show how week their case really was.

  10. Thanks for another update, Mas. Well written, and very thoughtful.

    I haven’t yet received my CCW license, just need the money.

    But my gun and ammo is purchased – Ruger LCR with Remington Golden Sabers.

    I guess people tend to find revolvers more “innocent,” despite the fact that my gun is fully loaded and has no safety, and always has the chamber loaded.

  11. Guys give the devil his due. Our opponets are of a differant paradigm. People are taught in law school: If the law is on your side argue the law. If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If neither are on your side spin the crap out of it. They live in an ends justify the means world that cares little for fact or truth, just getting thier way like a spoit child is all that matters. We have to take that in consideration as a part of problem before the problem even starts.

    My instinct would have been dump the whole magazine into him, before the lights went out for good. 🙁

  12. The point about being able to explain why you carry that specific weapon, those specific rounds, and that specific holster (etc) is well taken.

    I have been carrying for a number of years, but in the course of my wife becoming licensed to carry, attending an NRA class, and just becoming part of the Polite Society in general, we have discussed (at length) *every* aspect of every purchase we made. We rented more than a dozen different handguns (in four calibers) and shot a variety of ammo at our local indoor range, before deciding on which handgun to buy.

    She knows exactly why she carries that specific handgun (M&P Compact 9mm), why its fitted with those specific fiber optic sights (and why I use a Lasergrip, but she does not), and why it is loaded with that specific ammo (124 gr Hydrashok). She doesn’t know everything she wants to know about shooting or self defense yet, but she understands clearly the choices she has made and the tradeoffs of every decision she has taken so far.

    This has come up many times in conversations with family, friends and coworkers – if they ask her why she carries, and what she carries, she’s got the knowledge to answer confidently. I am very proud of her, too.

  13. Jim Clark,

    “Here is a link to a great Bill Whittle video…”

    It’s too bad Mr. Whittle couldn’t have made a video expressing simply the facts without all the sermonizing about the MSM and Reverends Sharpton and Jackson.

    If he’d done that, then I could have linked people to it and said “Look, here’s an unbiased recitation of some cold facts you may not have heard.” As it is, it would look like I was saying “Hey, don’t believe that Left Wing propaganda you’re being fed! Try this Right Wing propaganda instead!”

    Unfortunately, the fish on my side of the tank don’t seem to notice the water they’re swimming in, either.

  15. Could you address the statement by the attorney about not carrying a gun that had been use to kill someone. My opinion is that I would definitely carry it for the sheer fact that it worked exactly as expected. I may be concerned it would somehow become a talisman though. Thank you.

  16. Doesn’t seem to be an issue, Joe K. Lots of cops, for example, have continued to carry the guns they used to save their lives.

    Many years ago, an officer was off duty when he had to kill a man in self defense. In deposition, the lawyer suing him asked snidely of the 1911 .45 he used to save his life, “Is that your favorite weapon?”

    The officer paused for a moment to think and answered, “It is now.”

  18. The officer paused for a moment to think and answered, “It is now.”

    Thanks, dark humor but still, good for a chuckle.

  19. Great series Mas; I am glad to see facts, common sense, and logic do prevail somewhere.
    And further pleased that not only do I agree, but also exercise my 2nd with adherence to legal requirements, caution, and good ‘ole common sense.

  21. Another great article and insight on the Zimmerman Case.

    I’ve been a big fan of your since I read “In The Gravest Extreme” back when it first came out. I’ve had to replace my copy several times since I have given a copy away to several folks seriously interested in self defense and concealed carry.

    Like most folks I was wondering when you were going to get into providing reality base perspectives on the Zimmerman Case. Zimmerman’s lawyers did a great job and those ladies on the jury upheld the law.

    Thanks.

  22. The fact that the prosecution had such a weak case shows their arrogance. They did not feel the need to present “REAL” evidence. They had been fed hype and B.S. by everyone from the media to the president, and thought they had an open and shut case by the fact that everyone would want to do the politically correct thing. “Politically Correct” should be an oxymorron, we are crippling ourselves and our system with this garbage. Protect yourselves, your rights, your family, your neighbors. Who else will do it? Use your head, do your own thinking. Don’t let someone else do it for you.

  23. In the first comment to this section and in prior comments I asked Mas if Zimmerman should have left his truck if the police dispatcher had not asked him to do so. (I disagree that the dispatcher did that, but let’s just assume for the purposes of this discussion that he didn’t.) Mas hasn’t answered, but I now know why: He has already answered that question. It was in his book, the Gun Digest Book of Concealed Carry, 2nd Edition. In providing instruction to those who would engage in concealed carry, Mas relate the story of Larry Lindsey from 2006. Lindsey was a guy who had witnessed an act of road rage, a couple of traffic violations, and some reckless driving and decided to follow the guy into a parking lot to get his license plate number. Before he was able to do so, he was confronted with three angry guys, one of whom looked like he was about to draw on Lindsey, and Lindsey drew first causing them to back off. Lindsey, however, was charged with Felony Menacing for showing his gun. Mas appeared as an expert witness and Lindsey was acquitted. In discussing the case, Mas shows how Lindsay did nothing illegal, but then says at page 39, “carefully consider the risks before you pursue or even follow a wrongdoer,” and then goes on to conclude, “[W]hen the newspaper and TV news stories appear applauding the heroic citizen who led the police to the bad guy or even captured him by his lonesome, please notice that there’s almost always a quote from a police spokesman who says, ‘We appreciate this citizen’s heroism, but we have to urge the public not to go after people they see commit crimes. It can be very dangerous.’ They ain’t just blowing politically correct smoke. The bad guy may just turn on you … [or] … you can find yourself going throught the same terrible ordeal in court that he [Larry Lindsey] did.” So, to summarize what Mas said there, it’s not “just blowing politically correct smoke” to “urge the public not to go after people they see commit crimes” or, as Mas says, to “even follow a wrongdoer.” So Mas is already on record, at least in theory, that Zimmerman should have stayed in his truck had it not been for the police dispatcher asking where the suspect was. (And neither that request nor anything which could have been mistaken for that request happened before Zimmerman left his vehicle, just listen to the tape.)

  26. Long Island Mike, pay for the class. It’s worth every cent. Travel out of state if you have to. It’s still worth every cent.

  28. Rob, not true. I think he was a fool who irresponsibly set into motion a spiral of events which ended, with considerable contribution from Martin, in a tragedy for both him and Martin and which could have been avoided if he had just remained in his truck. I do not believe that he was legally responsible and that it is more likely than not that Martin made the initial physical attack that ended up with Zimmerman having to defend himself with deadly force. But none of that would have happened if Zimmerman would just have remained in his truck. Before saying any more about that, I now want to see what Mas is going to say. (And I’ll be more patient, Mas, I promise…) But hate Zimmerman? No.

  29. The best thing for Zimmerman would have been to buy a house in a safer neighborhood with no large population of violent minorities. Second best NEVER to get involved in community affairs, it just makes you a target.
    Geoff
    Who notes much of Florida is devolving to the Somalia level, a couple of Brit tourists found this out when they made a wrong turn and were killed.

  30. The grand irony of the Zimmerman trial is that SYG statutes have been passed in direct response to abuses of authority and process by police, prosecutors and judges directed against innocent citizens who are forced to defend themselves. How ironic that the very sort of political show trial that SYG was designed to prevent instead came to pass, and that due to the same old abuses of power.

  31. i wanted to comment about the emphasis prosecution put on whether zimmerman pressed the barrel against martin’s stomach or not. i guess it was supposed to show zimmerman’s ill-will. i imagine if we ignore the intensity of the scuffle, the risk of FTF due to out-of-battery and instead look at it like a scripted, well rehearsed movie scene, sure it would seem like ill-will IF the barrel was pressed against martin’s stomach, which it wasn’t. it goes to show how the prosecution will use every bit to attack the defendant.

    on whether the state did not know about firearms or intentionally vilified certain aspects of its usage.. they proved that they’re not familiar with tweeter when they failed to understand the difference between “follows” and “following” and they still brought it up during questioning and got burnt for it. i would not be surprised if they don’t know about firearms either.

    regarding zimmerman being “asked” to follow: i do not believe he was asked. it may have been understood as such. the dialogue went like this:

    [Z] ($h!t) he’s running
    [D] he’s running? which way is he running?
    [car] ding ding
    [Z] down towards the entrance of the neighborhood
    [D] ok which entrance is that that he’s heading toward?
    [Z] the back entrance
    [Z] (f’n) punks
    [D] are you following him?
    [Z] yea
    [D] ok we don’t need you to do that
    [Z] ok
    {12 sec of breathing, ambient noises}
    [Z] he ran

    we could argue whether asking “which way is he running” is truly a trigger to follow someone but that only feeds the claim that this event could have been avoided only if zimmerman did not get out of his car. the truth is there are many only ifs that would have presumably prevented the fatality aspect of the event.

    only if martin went home and did not wait 4 minutes to confront the “white ass cracka”.
    only if martin did not punch zimmerman in the nose.
    only if martin did not mount zimmerman and beat him up for 40 seconds.
    only if martin did not yell “you’re gonna die tonite [mofo]” and reach for zimmerman’s gun.
    only if one of the neighbors physically intervened.
    only if martin’s dad was home that nite.
    and so on..

    why has zimmerman getting out of his car become the bing-bang theory of this case?

  32. @KiA: every case that polarizes the nation is no longer about facts, but about opportunities for the same old factions long at war to once again meet and do battle. This case can be viewed as Zimmerman’s fault or Martin’s fault purely based on what prism you look at it through.
    Most of us gun people and good citizens naturally have a hard time accepting that upon spotting something out of place or suspicious, simply being noticed by a subject, or even following them to get a good look and inform the authorities, will place us in the criminal category should said criminal suddenly turn to assault mode. It’s blaming the good guy and victim.

    The reason for that trial is political because the facts themselves scream clear self-defense. It’s the protagonists’ intents that have become the focus, and which one you fixate on betrays your particular bias.

    The same obvious dissonance was observed during the OJ trial. People believe what they want to believe. That the justice system is able to capitalize on that and manipulate emotions when facts are lacking is the true travesty, to steal from Don West.

    What cracks me up is that most Martin supporters would’ve wanted Zimmerman to call the cops and go home. First of all, if you’ve ever done it you know, as Zimmerman did, that cops have better things to do than investigate every citizen’s suspicions. So “just dial 911” is really euphemism for, “leave us alone”, because the response will usually be a casual drive through a few minutes to hours later (i.e. symbolic and too late).
    Then if they truly hoped for a police instead of civvie response, then it’s possible that Martin would’ve been gotten a much rawer deal. The next demonstrations might’ve been about police brutality, racial profiling and overkill rather than vigilantism in that ideal scenario of theirs.

  33. With regard to the maudlin ramblings of media idiots, those who wallow in ignorance of most anything having to do with firearms, Mr. Zimmerman’s pistol was of a commonly available design known as Double Action Only, and operates in a manner similar to a double action revolver, the hammer spur of which had been removed or a hammer less revolver, which actually has a shrouded hammer.

    Seems as if the basics of mechanical or firearms design are beyond the ken of media types, and besides, why mention facts that tend to disrupt the “story”, especially as the facts of the matter often do.

  34. As I was watching the trials quickly saw where the prosecutor was headed when he got out the Kel-Tec. I was unfortunately proven right that he would make it about the “scary gun” with *gasp* no safety!

    Mas, great article. On some gun forums I read people who won’t carry the Hornady “Zombie” sd rounds because they are afraid of how tht would be spun by prosecutors in a sd shooting. I understand their point somewhat, but I try to explain that with a simple defense line of questioning the jury will be mad to understand tht those rounds are no different from regular sd rounds, they are just tacky green.

    It’s too bad things happened tht night the way they did, but charges should have never been brought.

  35. Dave, I’ve been reading a few of your comments on various posts here and I think you bring up some valid questions. Although it’s a dated thread already, I’ll just give my two cents though it may not be read.

    I think the Sean Hannity interview is probably the closest we get to understanding Zimmerman’s state of mind at the time, along with the background story done by Reuters. I believe the neighborhood had had 8 burglars before the shooting and one of them occurred in his neighbor’s house with the woman terrified for her life and her baby (she later moved away). Zimmerman had seen one of them stealing a bike off his porch one morning. Several people had observed casings of houses. One of those Zimmerman had seen, was later arrested for an actual break-in.

    I think for a moment we need to really try and understand the feelings of fear and helplessness in the members of this community, and the determination by Zimmerman and others involved in the watch organization to make a difference. It used to be a safe neighborhood, then recession hit and it became destabilized as renters moved in. Stealing things is I guess a ‘petty’ crime perhaps, in many cases, but of course people are killed in burglaries, severely beaten, or simply traumatized. In my old neighborhood, a couple was shot and killed when they arrived home while their house was being burglarized.

    I don’t think it’s a far stretch to assume Zimmerman was indeed acting in the belief that he was observing a casing (and who knows after what we have learned about the found jewelry in his bag back home). Trayvon wasn’t *just* walking at a slow pace, not seeming to bother with the rain; he was looking around him as if to make sure no one was watching him (I believe this is in the Hannity piece). He was also walking on the lawn, not the street.

    At that point, there had been no violent burglaries, so ‘while you never can be sure’, perhaps it just didn’t seem likely to Zimmerman at the time he got out of his car, that actually meeting up with Martin might present a deadly threat, or even a physical one. And if Martin was running/half-running *away*, Z’s logical conclusion was probably that Martin was trying to get away, as in trying to escape from the cops soon to arrive. I’m fairly certain he knew Zimmerman was on the phone with the police.