I don't know the ins and outs of what is allowed during a trail, but can the prosecution bring this up? Considering that right now this case is he said/he said, plus whatever forensics they have, can the prosecution use this to show that Zimmerman is not a credible guy?? Can they use it against him at trial?
It can be used aginst him in trial only if he testifies because its probative value is only relevant to his credibility. And credibility only becomes an issue if he restifies.
So Zimmerman is in a bit of a Catch-22. If he testifies, his credibility is subject to attack. If he doesn't testify, he will not likely be able to sustain his burden of presenting the necessary elements of the affirmative defense of self defense.
If I were defending him, I would be scurrying to see if I could establish the self defense argument through other witnesses. If it's shaky, which it likely will be. I'd have him testify, and on direct testimony question him about the false statements at the bail hearing. I would ask him to explain himself in open ended questions, which would soften the impact on the jurors and take some of the sting out of cross-examination.
That was a lesson that wiser attorneys taught me when I was young: Don't try to hide your warts and scars. Rather display them openly.
