It is clear from court and public records that George Zimmerman has sometimes been less than truthful.
After shooting Trayvon Martin in late February, he told Sanford police he didn't have a criminal history. He did. Several weeks later, he told the Seminole County Sheriff's Office he had never been in a pretrial-diversion program. That's also untrue.
He contradicted himself on the witness stand in April, telling Trayvon's family during an apology that he had thought their son was close to his age. On the night of the shooting, Zimmerman, 28, described the 17-year-old to police as in his "late teens."
And now Zimmerman is back in jail because he sat silently as his wife, Shellie, testified — under oath — at his bond hearing in April that the couple were, essentially, flat broke. At the time, they had access to about $135,000, funds raised through a website he launched after he shot Trayvon.
Given that Zimmerman is the only surviving witness to the moments before the fatal shot, his credibility is important, experts say.
"Credibility is always a paramount issue in any trial," said Douglas Keene, a trial consultant and forensic psychologist based in Austin, Texas. In a self-defense case, he said, a jury must decide "whether or not someone can be trusted to have used good judgment."
If the Zimmerman case goes to trial, Keene said jurors will have to choose between competing narratives: Was George Zimmerman a vigilante profiling an unarmed teen? Or was he a concerned citizen trying to prevent crime in his community?