A Key Witness in the George Zimmerman Trial Says the Prosecution Threw The Case

A medical examiner and key witness in the George Zimmerman trial allegedly has information — no, proof — that Trayvon Martin was not the aggressor during the brawl that ended his life. However, the key witness, Shiping Bao, claims he never had an opportunity to convey this information, along with seven other key pieces of evidence, during the trial. 

According to Victor Swift, an attorney in Stuart, Florida, Bao had a total of eight points he wanted to convey to the jury that he claims were blocked by prosecutors from State's Attorney Angela Corey's office in Jacksonville. In addition to evidence that Martin was not the aggressor, Bao also found through thorough research that the amount of marijuana in Martin's body at the time would have made him less, not more, aggressive. Unfortunately this piece of information did not reach the jury either.

Bao claims this is because the prosecution was biased against Martin. Willie E. Gary, Bao's attorney, told reporters that the prosecution's general attitude was that Martin got what he deserved. According to Gary, Bao was ready to offer scientific evidence that Martin was not the aggressor, but prosecutors told him to "Shut up. Don't say those things."

This information was released Tuesday, after Bao was fired from his job as an associate medical examiner for Florida's Volusia County for his "poor communication skills" and for providing inconsistent testimony when he changed his opinion regarding several key issues. However, Bao's most recent annual evaluation proves quite the contrary. The evaluation placed him in the "Exceeds Expectations" category with a score of 87 and stated, "Dr. Bao is thorough in his casework and formulates logical and defensible cause of death opinions; researches the literature as needed on unusual findings."

Bao is reportedly preparing to file suit against the attorney's office, claiming that he was wrongfully terminated and unfairly scapegoated for the failure of the prosecution to secure a guilty verdict.

The inconsistent testimony Bao is being cited for include changed opinions on the length of time Martin was alive after he was shot and the effect of the marijuana in Martin's body at the time of the fight. Bao disagrees this is a problem and said, "... opinion can be changed ... If you have new information, if you have new experience, if you read a new book, you are changed opinion. If someone never change opinion ... You never learn, right?”

Bao is absolutely right in stating that as long as an individual's opinion of a particular topic is changed based on new knowledge gained from learning and that new opinion should be held to higher regard than a prior opinion that was based on a less developed knowledge of the facts. More confidence should be placed in Bao's amended testimony because it includes hours and hours of additional research, whereas his initial opinion was based on a less sophisticated understanding of the facts.

These newly released statements raise an important question: was the prosecution biased against Martin? If Bao's allegations turn out to be true, Zimmerman could face much harsher consequences than he faces now. It's hard to imagine why the state wouldn't want to hear proof of why Martin couldn't have been the aggressor, since that information could've swayed the jury. At the same time, it would probably be a waste of time to sit around and wait for those who thought Martin deserved what he got to look for proof of why he had no reason to die.