oh n/m that was Zimmerman's lawyer... but the prosecutor did say the motive was "because he wanted to."

I dont understand how you can prove that in court, beyond a reasonable doubt. I can paint about 15 pictures to the alternative right now. Plus this is in FL, so I could probably convince a jury that Martin had the gun and was chasing Zimmerman with it and tripped and shot himself...

You know that just talking about this case makes you a racist, right?

Your naivete is sexy.

It's almost like you think the court system isn't full of politicians, appointed by politicians who are hell bent on destroying our constitutional rights.

I'm going to assume you're just trying to seduce me.

does it? I thought that was the witness who testified that she saw zimmerman running south, something she never said before in any statement...

She also "liked" the Justice for Trayvon facebook page and signed a petition for the state to bring charges against Zimmerman. Don't worry, his lawyer has been competent enough to do everything he can to discredit her which may or may not work depending on the jury.

this jury is not going to convict zimmerman; probably the worst jury the state could get, let alone case. Has Zimmerman's lawyer attacked the case in general yet? that the state was only pursuing it, not after evidence presented itself, but after the mob swayed them to?

I have not kept up with the case in enough detail to know exactly what has been said. I don't think he has taken that angle yet, though. He doesn't really need to do that either. There is not really enough evidence and if he claims prosecution due to public outcry that could backfire with the jury. He just has to keep poking ginormous holes in all of the States "evidence" and offer 15 of the 200 alternate theories of what may have happened and there is no way that the jury could rationally find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I hope witness #8 has to be excussed because her entire testomy would be hearsay.

wow, if this was the state's key witness, that was awful. basically the only thing she was sure of was her name.

pretty sure she committed perjury as well...and only gave opinion on who's voice is whose.

Reuters headline: "Trayvon Martin was followed by 'creepy' man, witness tells murder trial"

Buried in paragraph 9, the actual phrase: "He told me the man looked like 'a creepy ass cracker,'" Jeantel said, using a pejorative term for Southern whites.


pe·jo·ra·tive /pəˈjôrətiv/
Adjective
Expressing contempt or disapproval.

Noun
A word expressing contempt or disapproval.

Synonyms
derogatory


Conspicuously missing from the article is the other term Martin used to reference Zimmerman.

All of the pejoratives are missing from this version of the Reuters article. What is there? "Gunned down." In other articles, they use the phrase, "opened fire."


Zimmerman fired one round.

SANFORD: “Get off! Get off!” witness says she heard in Zimmerman trial - Trayvon Martin - MiamiHerald.com

I dunno how her testimony was allowed in court. it was complete fabrication and hearsay. I would have objected to every word out of her mouth and objected to her being able to testify at all, she also changed her story from her disposition, not the first "witness" to do this...

okay the defense is objecting this--about her testimony changing--because obviously it's very damaging.

lol, she just said she can't read cursive.

omg, this is so painful.

19 years old and finishing High School. Product of white oppression!

I FTFY

witness was coached again after the recess, she's finally saying something other than yes, sir.

You have spotted typical "lies by omission". Leaving out information to mislead the reader/viewer, without telling actual untruths. This is what happens when newsies or editors in chief have an agenda. Very common.

And no, it's not a "conspiracy" :rolleyes: It's what happens when a bunch of newsies are all educated at the same university system, drink the same KoolAid, and create a self-perpetuating system via selection (i.e. editors tend not to hire journos with political views they find unpleasant)

what about when she gives an interview and says "I couldn't hear Trayvon." then testified in court: "I said, I COULD hear trayvon." All after playing the recording where it was clear what she did or did not say...

saw a facebook status about her testimony an how awful it was. now i wish i watched

its still going on. watch it live like me. its good for a laugh.

Your cliffs are good enough for me. I really don't care what happens in the case per se, but interested to see how many riots an acquittal will cause.

cracker is not racist, just descriptive.

Here is a good link if you are interested. Skews pro-Zimmy though.
Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

on the stand right now is an FBI voice recognition specialist, the state's witness, is testifying he cannot determine who the yelling is in the 911 call because of the sample size, the emotion in the voice, the signal to noise, the distance, etc etc.

again, this is the STATE'S witness. I don't understand.

Braineack - Will you do me a favor and please correct the spelling in the thread title?

I'm starting to wonder if the state is intentionally trying to help the defense, to show that this case never should have gone to trial in the first place. As though the whole thing was a dog and pony show to appease the political pressure to arrest.

I have a feeling they know they have no case and are only going through the motions because they have to, since that special DA charged zimmerman through mob pressure and wanting her 15 minutes.

there were a few voice people that werent allowed to testify, but the state still called up this guy, who said basically he couldn't determine: who it was or what age range it might have been.

he basically said you need at least 1-3 of good clear normal talking to determine a voice and that any extreme circumstances render the sample useless. The sample in question is about 3 seconds long.

They also couldn't determine a close age range because 1. one person was possibly going through pubrity so his voice could be anywhere, 2. again, the sample was too small, 3. anyone yelling in extreme situation will be around 600-700Hz regardless of age/sex.

I seriously had to double check this wasn't a defense attorney talking right now with him, the only reason i can see this witness being called is to disqualify any other witness from the defense that might try to say they can tell it IS zimmerman screaming.

okay, looks like he's trying to set it up so that he is saying that a family member would be in a good position to be able to recognize the person. A very bad setup, because zimmerman's dad is already planning to testify that it is zimmerman in the call yelling...

wanna know what 4th place looks like?

http://newsbusters.org/sites/default...jpg?1372652140

This Detective Serino is one tough cookie. Sounds like straight out of central casting.

THIS is why you need a lawyer even if you did nothing wrong.

Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network
Premier instructor on lawful use of deadly force - Massad Ayoob

Why'd he leave a federal gig for a local police job after 2 years?

anyways, i think I figured out where the DA is going. Zimmerman probably made 5 statements that said after he got Trayvon, he got on top of him and spread his arms apart or held his arms down when the first witness showed up. Problem is, about 4-5 people testified they came upon the scene with Trayvon face down with his hands under his body.

Zimmerman made a few claims as if he didnt know trayvon was dead, and that he showed remorse because he feared god in an interview. I think the state will try to use this to try to say that Zimmerman was lying, knew he was dead, and was trying to make himself look better with police. Something like that. Best I can figure out, they wont find him guilty anyways.


and about Serino's testimony, he was trying to say what proper police procedure is after a suspect goes down, how youd keep a gun on him and not holster, but zimmerman was not a cop and doesnt know police procedure.

then the DA kept referring to Zimmerman calling Trayvon the "suspect" in written statements and crap...trying to play up the narrative of him being a rouge "cop" set to kill black kids. It's a really really really weak position for a 2nd degree murder case.

Agreed on both counts. Serino looks and sounds even more like a "Hollywood detective" than half the actors playing them.

SamNavy has had great input on how to handle yourself in the unlikely event of having to defend yourself or others with deadly force. I would also suggest turning to a self-defense oriented attorney as well, rather than just one at random.

Today we are going to try to prove someone committed 2nd degree murder because he has commented he was tired of criminals getting away with crimes in his neighborhood.

FINALLY something from the state that does good for the state; playing audio from cops interviewing zimmerman and questioning his story.

finally adressing this. I'm so smart.

Oh interesting. Apparently they found a slim jim (the tool, not the food) in the area that Zimmerman said he first saw Trayvon and called the non-emergency line. And it where he was spotted and when Zimmerman called, it was a house that has had break-ins before, and the owner had not locked his windows or doors...

Please tell me there are prints...

Not sure, this was the first I've heard mention of it.

right now it's another bad witness the state called, zimmerman's close friend who is a peace officier, apparently he wrote a book about the account. just telling the story about how zimmerman told him the story. didnt get much from it, defense is all over him extracting good stuff.

im still assuming, eventually from all of it, they'll try to piece together the idea that zimmerman's story is completely false because of XYZ (small little insignificant details that dont prove a damn thing), and that Zimmerman was racially profiling the asshole punk Trayvon, and that he decided to take the law into his hands and just gun him down on his way to Target.

damn man, I get more information from this frikkin thread than the news lol

lunch time.


like the state keeps pressing:

the "these assholes always get away" and "fucking punks" comment.
when and why he hosltered the weapon.
the body position.
how conscience he was after the fact.
why he called him a suspect in written statements.
why he followed trayvon down the path.
not knowing the address/street name.
it's not against the law to wear a hoodie.

What I believe they are trying to do is pretty much ignore most of the facts of the night and simply try to paint zimmerman as a person who was frustrated with the crime in his area and the fact that they weren't getting captured. That this made him disgruntled and angry, and he took it upon himself to stop it. He profiled Trayvon as a criminal who was guilty of a crime. He confronted and attacked Trayvon. That Trayvon yelled for help and was then shot by Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman did not have remorse for the death, and that he was not injured as far as he's claiming and that he knew exactly what he was doing.

No prove of course, but this is the best angle they have to prove 2nd degree murder, but so far they are doing a very poor job of presenting this angle. I dont see what other angle they have. Still have no clue how many more people they'll call to the stand...but it probably wont all come together until closing arguments.

I wonder how long they're going to drag this out before the jury gets to decide that nobody really knows what happened.

I'm enjoying the play by play though, thanks Brain.

too long. if this wasn't such a show trial, they'd have a verdict already.

oh yeah, something interesting that came up: when police tried to challenge Zimmerman's story and they were talking about confrontation, they told Zimmerman that Trayvon was actually recording the whole thing on his phone at the time. Zimmerman replied, oh good I hope it captured exactly what happened. He also hoped that there might have been cameras in the courtyard by the HOA.

What hasn't come up is why they decided to charge him, like what changed in the investigation that led from them all believing his story and passing all the challenges/lies the police used to trick him into confession of a crime to charging him with a crime months later. I'm sure it wont come up at trial, maybe a defense witness, but it's something I'd like to know.

He would have to have the best poker face in the world if he had anything to hide. That is probably the most common way they get people to confess or slip up. Facts like this are the reason that the jury will not be able to come back guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There is so much god damn reasonable doubt that it isn't even funny.

another thing about the altercation: Zimmerman has never once said that Trayvon grabbed the gun, always reaching for, or trying to get it. That would be such an easy thing to lie about and help the story. Later they found there was no DNA from Trayvon on the gun, but I thought that is an interesting point...here the state is trying to paint zimmerman as a lier who was hell bent on killing trayvon and he has never changed/altered his story and he didn't even twist the truth to help his favor.

Can someone explain to me how CNN broadcast that information but none of the other channels did? My understanding is that the info was shown in the "media pool." I would think anyone filming live would have put up the same thing. No?

Fox didn't broadcast it, they had other cameras they could pull from. For example, they never showed the pictures of the body during their live coverage...

right now the state has called a medical examiner to the stand to say Zimmerman's injuries were not life threatening.

Well, of course, he's not dead.

Well, they would have been if the guy doing it to Zimmerman wouldn't have been shot and had kept it up. Do they think he would have stopped on his own? Idiots.

the state is just trying to paint a picture, that's all, they have nothing else.

non life threaten damage, profiling, disgruntled, lier, killer.



the defense again, is using her very well to his side. like trayvon had absolutely no damage on his body but for the gunshot (which was shot away from his body; the bullet entered the shirt inches away from the body, suggesting the gunshot was from below). zimmerman didnt happen to have a medical examiner on hand to be able to access his wounds before shooting, so shucks.

also, he was aware there were people around, but no one was helping. Good had come outside and said "im going to call the police" Zimmerman and Good's story match in this regard, the problem was, Zimmerman said, dont call the police, HELP ME. Good did not intervene, Zimmerman shot moments later, and then sometime between 30 seconds and a minute or so later a police officier showed up. I feel like that's kinda an important issue, here's someone pleading for help, he thinks he's going to die, he thinks the person attacking him is going to grab his gun, he knows someone is witnessing it and not helping, I mean what else was he to do?

If was really commiting 2nd degree murder, why would he wait until he was getting jumped and his ass beat? If he caught Trayvon in bed with his wife, he chased him down and killed him, then I'd say yeah he's guilty of 2nd degree. There's just no chance for the state and this is just a waste of time/money. it's all a show and they all want 15 minutes since FL lets cameras inside the courtroom.

Are you supposed to wait until after you have life threatening injuries to defend yourself? Seems like that would almost defeat the purpose.

that's what the state is going to try to argue apparently. Thats why they used the medical examiner witness to convey.

The fixation on race, instead of looking at the victim and the shooter as 2 individuals, is ludicrous.

The gov't and the media love to put people into boxes and divide them.

right now they are arguing 5 exhibits to be admitted into court. a few documents and textbooks from GZ's schooling.

The state is trying to use these documents to paint GZ as a wannabe cop, who knew about the stand your ground law, knew how to profile, and knew police procedures, and therefore had knowledge on ways to cover up a murder/crime.

Hey Police? Hey there's this guy I'm about to shoot in cold blood, in spite. Please meet me at the mailboxes and I'll show you to the body. Hurry, I'm about to do it. Come arrest me.

they allowed the documents and such; the judge is the state's lapdog. They better allow evidence about TM's past now.

I'm still trying to figure out how the prosecution intends to show how SYG applies here. The media went apeshit over it, and still continues to, but you can't apply it to either version of events.

The state's case is weak, so they have to use every inconsisteny in his state to prove he's a lier with ill will.

In an interview with Sean Hannity, GZ claimed to not know about the law. So now the state wants to prove he DID know about it and he's a liar.

They'll just keep a stockpile of all the small minute indescrepencies in the story and "falsehoods" and they pile it up on the jury at the closing statements to paint a picture.