George Zimmerman: No DNA evidence of a struggle for his gun

George Zimmerman claims self defense in the killing of Trayvon Martin. But there's no DNA evidence that Trayvon Martin ever touched George Zimmerman's gun.

(AP Photo/State Attorney's Office, File)
The photo shows the Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm handgun used by George Zimmerman, the neighborhood†watch volunteer who shot Trayvon Martin. In documents released Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2012, forensic tests show Zimmerman's DNA was the only one that could be identified on the grip of the gun used to fatally shoot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

Forensic tests made public Wednesday show that George Zimmerman's was the only DNA that could be identified on the grip of the gun used to fatally shoot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

The results rule out Martin's DNA from being on the gun's grip. Zimmerman's DNA also was identified on the gun's holster, but no determination could be made as to whether Martin's DNA was on the gun's holster, according to the report from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for fatally shooting Martin during a confrontation in a gated community in Sanford in February. Zimmerman is pleading not guilty, claiming self-defense.

A delay in Zimmerman's arrest led to nationwide protests.

RECOMMENDED: How 5 black men view the Trayvon Martin case

The question of whose DNA is on the gun and holster could play a role in Zimmerman's defense.

Zimmerman says Martin had been on top of him, slamming his head against the ground and smothering his mouth and nose with his hand and arm when he grabbed his gun from a holster on his waist before Martin could get it. He shot the teenager once in the chest.

Prosecutors could argue that the lack of DNA means there's no evidence on the gun of a struggle, or that Zimmerman can't claim self defense.

Other documents released by prosecutors Wednesday include an interview with the clerk of a convenience store where Martin purchased Skittles and a can of iced tea moments before his confrontation with Zimmerman. The clerk said in the interview, more than a month after Martin was shot, that he didn't remember Martin.

"To be honest, I don't even remember that day," said the clerk, whose name was redacted from the audio interview.

Prosecutors also released hundreds of emails sent to then-Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee whose agency came under fire when Zimmerman wasn't immediately arrested. An email dated more than a week after Martin's death from a resident of the development where Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch leader thanked Lee for attending a recent association meeting. The email's author, Molly Jackson, said in an interview Wednesday that Zimmerman wasn't present at that association meeting.

RECOMMENDED: How 5 black men view the Trayvon Martin case

___

Associated Press writers Kyle Hightower in Orlando and Terry Spencer in Miami contributed to this report.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.