Just How Much Money Did Trayvon’s Parents Make Off His Death?

The Judge in the Zimmerman case is scheduled to rule today regarding Mark O’Mara’s request to “unseal” the settlement agreement in the civil suit between Martin’s parents and the homeowners association for the complex where Martin was killed. The settlement agreement has already been produced but the actual amount has been kept confidential, as required by the terms of the settlement agreement. It appears undisputed that the amount of the settlement is at least 1 Million dollars.

Generally the amount of money paid in a civil case would have no relevance in a criminal case. If the provisions of the settlement agreement require the parties to keep the terms of the settlement confidential, as in the case at hand, the amount of the settlement would generally not be relevant or admissible. However in this case O’Mara asserts that the recovery of a large settlement amount is relevant because it would provide a motive or incentive for the father to give favorable testimony towards his son’s innocence, and Zimmerman’s culpability. In particular O’Mara cites Tracy Martin’s statements immediately after the incident when he listened to the screams for help on the 9-11 recording. When Chris Serlino of the Sanford Police played the 911 recording shortly after the death, Martin’s father reported it was not the voice of his son.

Martin’s father changed his opinion about the voice he heard with the explanation that the newer version of the recording was clearer and that he was in an “extreme emotional state” when he first reported that it was not the voice of his son.

Initially the Court will have to consider whether the amount of the settlement is “discoverable” rather than whether it is “admissible” at trial. The standards are different, and simply because the judge allows the information to be available during discovery is not necessarily an indication that the evidence would be admissible during trial. Evidence of this sort might never be needed at trial by the defendant’s attorney as the father might not testify regarding his opinion of whether the voice is Trayvon Martin’s. Experts have done a voice analysis and determined that the voice IS NOT George Zimmerman’s.The testimony of these experts would likely be more persuasive than that of a parent. While O’Mara may offer testimony of an expert to refute the testimony of the state’s experts, such an expert has not yet been identified by O’Mara.

I would anticipate the judge will allow discovery of the amount of the settlement, but that decision would not necessarily mean that the jury would ever be allowed to be made aware of the settlement, or the amount thereof. O’Mara might try to call Martin’s father to testify simply to get before the jury his initial impression that the voice was not Trayvon’s. However the knowledge of the jury that the homeowner’s association paid a substantial amount of money to Martin’s parents might be perceived by the jury as an admission of culpability on the part of the homeowners association as a result of Zimmerman’s wrongful acts.

Thus, whether the judge requires disclosure of the amount of the settlement or not in the discovery phase of the case, at the time of trial it seems unlikely that the jury will ever be told about the settlement. In fact it may be O’Mara who would object to the jury knowing anything about the civil settlement. If I were the judge, I would sustain O’Mara’s objections to introduction of any evidence of a settlement in the civil case by the homeowner’s association. It would be too prejudicial to the Defendant to allow the jury to know anything about a civil settlement. If O’Mara uses the settlement as evidence he presents to the jury, he is not the caliber of attorney I think he is.