Why is George Zimmerman allowed to roam free tonight?

The prosecution didn't have voice analysis done on the screaming during the 911 call.

They need to watch more cop shows.

Step 1 to getting average people to pay attention at a jury trial: Don't lead up to your 10 second awful knock-knock joke with 45 seconds of disclaimers about how it shouldn't be held against your client.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:

The prosecution didn't have voice analysis done on the screaming during the 911 call.

They need to watch more cop shows.

If I recall, the judge didn't let them.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...

Hypatian wrote:

Step 1 to getting average people to pay attention at a jury trial: Don't lead up to your 10 second awful knock-knock joke with 45 seconds of disclaimers about how it shouldn't be held against your client.

That was, in fact, the worst delivered joke in the history of ever.

Maq wrote:
Hypatian wrote:

Step 1 to getting average people to pay attention at a jury trial: Don't lead up to your 10 second awful knock-knock joke with 45 seconds of disclaimers about how it shouldn't be held against your client.

That was, in fact, the worst delivered joke in the history of ever.

It makes me wonder if the other two members of Zimmerman's dream team are Daniel Tosh and Michael Richards.

With a guy like Zimmmerman, you are not going to win with the like-ability angle. Frankly, it is damn tough to get with that angle at anyone accused of a violent felony.

Secondly, I think that joke actually works if you make it an early jury interview question at selection. The defendant may or may not be in the room at this time. Tension is high for a variety of reasons. But you need to deliver with confidence. Mincing about like Hugh Grant asking out a date in one of his movies is not the way to go about it.

Thirdly, don't tell jokes about your client. You can poke fun at a ridiculous argument made by opposing counsel, you can mock a witness for giving outlandish testimony.

Maq wrote:
Hypatian wrote:

Step 1 to getting average people to pay attention at a jury trial: Don't lead up to your 10 second awful knock-knock joke with 45 seconds of disclaimers about how it shouldn't be held against your client.

That was, in fact, the worst delivered joke in the history of ever.

I was really hoping he'd launch into a long-winded explanation of the joke afterwards, just to make things even more terrible.

To be fair to him, I did laugh pretty hard at the joke. I was just laughing for all the wrong reasons.

Eliciting douche chills should probably not be a legal tactic.

Seth wrote:
H.P. Lovesauce wrote:

The prosecution didn't have voice analysis done on the screaming during the 911 call.

They need to watch more cop shows.

If I recall, the judge didn't let them.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...

That was the thing. They had two voice forensics experts whose scientific approach seemed to be "listening real hard."

They needed to digitize it, eliminate the background noise, amplify the low end, match the sound waves against available sample of Martin and Zimmerman. You know, science and sh*t, like on CSI.

When you get down to it, you might as well allow a phrenologist in if you are going to get an export to break down wave forms and say they are like fingerprints.

Wow, it looks like the prosecution's case is completely falling apart. Not only was their star witness Rachel Jeantel unconvincing in proving that Zimmerman started the fight, but she also admitted to lying which completely hurt her credibility. But today we have a witness claiming Martin was on top giving Zimmerman an MMA-style beatdown.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimm...

I know there's conflicting reports on that, but all the defense needs to do is raise enough reasonable doubt.

jdzappa wrote:

Wow, it looks like the prosecution's case is completely falling apart. Not only was their star witness Rachel Jeantel unconvincing in proving that Zimmerman started the fight, but she also admitted to lying which completely hurt her credibility. But today we have a witness claiming Martin was on top giving Zimmerman an MMA-style beatdown.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimm...

I know there's conflicting reports on that, but all the defense needs to do is raise enough reasonable doubt.

I think the prosecution had an uphill battle from the start due to police bungling. I never really expected that Zimmerman would be convicted. I can only hope that Martin's family sues him in civil court, OJ style.

Nevin73 wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

Wow, it looks like the prosecution's case is completely falling apart. Not only was their star witness Rachel Jeantel unconvincing in proving that Zimmerman started the fight, but she also admitted to lying which completely hurt her credibility. But today we have a witness claiming Martin was on top giving Zimmerman an MMA-style beatdown.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimm...

I know there's conflicting reports on that, but all the defense needs to do is raise enough reasonable doubt.

I think the prosecution had an uphill battle from the start due to police bungling. I never really expected that Zimmerman would be convicted. I can only hope that Martin's family sues him in civil court, OJ style.

I had the same thought.

Short story is, this is kind of why most states and the federal government do not want any sort of broadcast equipment in the court room.

And this lends real credence to the point that judges and lawyers have made that this could chill people's willingness to testify.

Opposing counsel is going to tear into you, that is a given. But the media and public at large is inexcusable.

And it is sad that Florida seems to have allowed their judicial system turned into Judge Judy.

Everything is reality TV now.

Godsdammit that pisses me off.

One of the arresting officers also testified that Zimmerman's back was wet and covered with grass, corroborating his story that he was on his back.

USATODAY[/url]]Officer Timothy Smith, who handcuffed Zimmerman and took his gun away, said Zimmerman twice offered an explanation for the shooting while being transported to jail. "He stated to me that he was yelling for help and nobody came to help him," Smith testified.

Zimmerman also looked confused and told Smith he was light headed, but that he didn't want to go to the hospital, Smith said. While handling Zimmerman, Smith noticed that the back of Zimmerman's jacket and pants were wet and had grass blades on them. The moister indicated that Zimmerman "had been laying on his back," Smith said.

And they had a med-tech who testified that Zimmerman had been "intensively" training in MMA, thinking it would help some of his health conditions. Let's see - two witnesses say Zimmerman was on top; one says Martin. No damage to Martin's hands. Zimmerman's trained in ground and pound and significantly outweighs Martin, who was untrained... Sounds like a rolling-around kind of fight to me.

I'd feel much better about Zimmerman if there were any sign at all that he warned before firing.

Maybe I'm misremembering but wasn't his reason for "fearing for his life" that his head was being hit on the sidewalk?

Yes, but his head could be on the sidewalk and his body still be on the grass.
All the cop's testimony does is prove that he was on his back at some point in the fight. The most important factor in deciding whether he's guilty should be his actions leading up to the fight. I think it's highly doubtful that he told Trayvon that he had a gun or that he'd already called the cops and they were on their way.

Stengah wrote:

All the cop's testimony does is prove that he was on his back at some point in the fight.

Rallick wrote:

...No. F*cking. Way.

This is the best.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-25-2013/presumed-guiltocent

By his own account, he didn't warn him. Of course, I don't think he's required to, under Florida law. Just shoot and assert that your life was in danger.

Robear wrote:

And they had a med-tech who testified that Zimmerman had been "intensively" training in MMA, thinking it would help some of his health conditions. Let's see - two witnesses say Zimmerman was on top; one says Martin. No damage to Martin's hands. Zimmerman's trained in ground and pound and significantly outweighs Martin, who was untrained... Sounds like a rolling-around kind of fight to me.

I'd feel much better about Zimmerman if there were any sign at all that he warned before firing.

I saw this tidbit from a big MMA fan site. Supposedly, Zimmerman was taking MMA cardio lessons, think Taebo, and wasn't actually trained for real fighting. His limited training may have worked against him, since he might have been overconfident in his actual abilities once the blows started flying. If this is true, I'm sure the defense will capitalize on it later in the trial.

http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/news...

Big news today seemed to be Zimmerman's wounds were superficial and not life-threatening, and that there's no evidence his head got slammed. I'd like to ask the legal experts here - for self defense to stick, would it be enough for Zimmerman to say he was frightened for his life as soon as Martin got on top?

jdzappa wrote:

I'd like to ask the legal experts here - for self defense to stick, would it be enough for Zimmerman to say he was frightened for his life as soon as Martin got on top?

Do you mean feeling frightened for your life like when you're being stalked by a complete stranger at night?

OG_slinger wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

I'd like to ask the legal experts here - for self defense to stick, would it be enough for Zimmerman to say he was frightened for his life as soon as Martin got on top?

Do you mean feeling frightened for your life like when you're being stalked by a complete stranger at night?

Maybe I've missed it, but is there hard evidence that Zimmerman continued to stalk Martin after hanging up with 911 or violently confront him? Following someone is a dick move but in and of itself not considered a deadly threat. Being knocked to the ground is a far more frightening and dangerous situation. That's not to say that Zimmerman won't be found guilty of manslaughter. I just don't think the two situations are equal at all.

jdzappa wrote:

Maybe I've missed it, but is there hard evidence that Zimmerman continued to stalk Martin after hanging up with 911 or violently confront him? Following someone is a dick move but in and of itself not considered a deadly threat. Being knocked to the ground is a far more frightening and dangerous situation. That's not to say that Zimmerman won't be found guilty of manslaughter. I just don't think the two situations are equal at all.

Well, it would be pretty hard for the police to find Zimmerman standing over the body of Martin literally three minutes after he ended his 911 call unless he got out of his car and continued following Martin.

It seems like you're trying to argue that Zimmerman felt threatened by Martin and, therefore, was completely justified in his use of force while simultaneously ignoring the fact that Martin could have also felt threatened by Zimmerman stalking him and, therefore, was completely justified in his use of force.

Unfortunately we have no way of exactly knowing what was going through Martin's mind at the time because Zimmerman killed him. Well, that's not entirely true. We do know that Martin tried to run away from Zimmerman because Zimmerman mentioned that in his 911 call and that's why he got out of his car.

That means that Zimmerman getting out of his car, against police orders, became the turning point of the evening. It also made Zimmerman personally responsible for everything that followed. Period.

It doesn't matter if Zimmerman felt frightened, threatened, or was even attacked by Martin. That's because he should have stayed in his car and waited the three minutes it took for the police to show up. Had he just stayed in his car Martin would still be alive and merely still be pissed about the one night he was stopped and frisked by the cops just because one of his dad's fiancee's neighbors was paranoid and suspicious.

Zip down to section 3.04

In this case, the prosecution, so fa as I can tell is ramping up for the argument that Zimmerman instigated the encounter with Martin.

OG_slinger wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

Maybe I've missed it, but is there hard evidence that Zimmerman continued to stalk Martin after hanging up with 911 or violently confront him? Following someone is a dick move but in and of itself not considered a deadly threat. Being knocked to the ground is a far more frightening and dangerous situation. That's not to say that Zimmerman won't be found guilty of manslaughter. I just don't think the two situations are equal at all.

Well, it would be pretty hard for the police to find Zimmerman standing over the body of Martin literally three minutes after he ended his 911 call unless he got out of his car and continued following Martin.

It seems like you're trying to argue that Zimmerman felt threatened by Martin and, therefore, was completely justified in his use of force while simultaneously ignoring the fact that Martin could have also felt threatened by Zimmerman stalking him and, therefore, was completely justified in his use of force.

Unfortunately we have no way of exactly knowing what was going through Martin's mind at the time because Zimmerman killed him. Well, that's not entirely true. We do know that Martin tried to run away from Zimmerman because Zimmerman mentioned that in his 911 call and that's why he got out of his car.

That means that Zimmerman getting out of his car, against police orders, became the turning point of the evening. It also made Zimmerman personally responsible for everything that followed. Period.

It doesn't matter if Zimmerman felt frightened, threatened, or was even attacked by Martin. That's because he should have stayed in his car and waited the three minutes it took for the police to show up. Had he just stayed in his car Martin would still be alive and merely still be pissed about the one night he was stopped and frisked by the cops just because one of his dad's fiancee's neighbors was paranoid and suspicious.

No, I never said that Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force just because he felt threatened. He MAY have been justified IF Martin attacked first and got him in a position where he thought there was a good chance he was going to die.

I'll give you that Zimmerman set the wheels in motion for this mess. But even if he did run up to Martin and demand to know what he was doing, I don't think that gives Martin the legal right to attack first. I'm not even sure Florida's Stand Your Ground laws would allow for that if Zimmerman didn't lunge or try to grab him. If ithe prosecution can definitively prove Zimmerman made the first move (which according to King Gorilla is what they're going to try to prove soon), then its game over.

As far as what was going through Martin's mind, we do know at least that soon before the showdown he was calling Zimmerman a racial slur, which in my mind means that racial tensions weren't just one sided.