The George Zimmerman trial has entered its second week and between the defense’s opening “knock-knock joke,” the racist and gendered language around the key witness Rachel Jeantel, and the media’s sensational coverage, the trial has turned into a full-blown media circus.
During the trial coverage today, the jury heard an audio recording of the interview with George Zimmerman from the night he fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
Sanford Police Detective Doris Singleton: Did you, at that time, ever say to him “I’m neighborhood watch”?
Zimmerman: No.
Officer Singleton: Did it not occur to you?
Zimmerman: No, I said, I don’t have a problem. And I started backing away from him
Officer Singleton: But you kinda did have a problem, that’s why you were following him, you had a concern with him.
Zimmerman: I was scared …
Officer Singleton: Too scared to tell him … that you were neighborhood watch? You were afraid to tell him that?
Zimmerman: Uh, … yes ma’am.
Officer Singleton: Look, I’m not trying to put you on the spot, but these are the questions people are going to ask and will seek out an answer. It seemed like a perfect opportunity to say “Look I’m neighborhood watch, I don’t recognize you, are you staying here?”
Like I said, he came up out of nowhere … so when he popped up, he just caught me off guard, and …
Officer Singleton: But can you see how that would frighten him? That you had been following him now through the whole park…?
I don’t know about you, but when I’m scared of someone, I don’t go chasing after said scary person.
In Part One of a special two part #TWiBRadio, we discussed the spectacle of the Trayvon Martin case, we aired our special insider audio from Congress, and rehashed how we spent our week at Netroots Nation 2013.
Subscribe on iTunes | Subscribe On Stitcher | Direct Download | RSS
And this morning on #amTWiB, L.Joy, Imani, and the rest of the #TheMorningCrew are back to talk about lazy Americans, the possible end to stop-and-frisk, and L.Joy tolerates banter.
Subscribe on iTunes | Subscribe On Stitcher | Direct Download | RSS
And we’ll be back with part two of this broadcast shortly, stay tuned!
NobodySpecial
All CNN can do is talk about how marvelously consistent Zimmerman’s story has been. /spit.
Frankensteinbeck
@NobodySpecial:
Alcoholics have marvelously consistent stories. It is always, ALWAYS someone else’s fault.
Jay in Oregon
As I said in an earlier thread, that whole “I was told not to follow him, so I started walking in the same direction behind him at a rapid pace” bit was pure Uncle Jimbo logic.
jl
That is a very good question that I have wondered about.
“Dude, I’m just the neighborhood watch. You live around here?”
What would have been so problematic about that little declaration?
But, it makes no difference. When Zimmerman said he was following the guy, and the dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that.” the guy became a vigilante, and I don’t see how even the most insane ‘stand your ground’ law applies.
I don’t know whether Zimmerman intended to do something to Martin based on race. The guy is surely an unstable ill-trained unprofessional fool and bigot who got himself in (edit: I should have typed ‘created and directly caused’) a tragic situation. He should be found guilty of something, whether it is murder or manslaughter, I don”t know.
Spaghetti Lee
It gets me real angry to think about how many conservatives are rooting for this murderer to walk. And yes, ‘murderer’ is the proper word, and should be used in any discussion of that filthy scumbag. We already know he shot and killed an unarmed kid. What’s being debated is whether that’s acceptable under Florida’s vigilantism-for-dummies laws. But no, all that matters is that the witness doesn’t speak Received Pronunciation, and you know the kid had it coming, you know how those people are, with the baggy jeans and the weed and the gang signs, harf harf.
I do think the ‘we’re being slowly dragged backwards in history’ stuff that gets thrown around here can be overdone-there’s lots of progress being made on race as well. But watching this shitshow trial and the feckless neo-Lester Maddoxes crowing about how Martin deserved to be shot, hell, it feels like Doc Brown sent us all back to 1958.
Forum Transmitted Disease
That he was scared is beyond question. Most racists are fucking terrified of the people they loathe so much.
He was terrified enough to follow another human being around and then shoot that person the instant that it looked like the encounter wasn’t going to go his way.
I’m sure Zimmerman was scared. I’m sure he’s been scared his entire life. He’s a chickenshit coward. It’s how they are.
Karmus
Adjective Police here. Sorry to be lame, but do you really mean to say you find the media coverage “sensational”? Do you, perhaps, mean “sensationalist?”
Sincerely curious,
The Adjective Police
PS Also, the quoted section is missing a “Zimmerman”, but that’s okay with me. I mean us.
leeleeFL
As I said a few weeks ago, I have a really bad feeling. I watched most of Rachel Jeantel’s testimony and thought she was both powerful and credible. I really dislike the lawyer who did cross. That means I cut him slack and he still came off crappy. If there is justice done here, I will be stunned!
jl
And what difference does it make whether Zimmerman’s story is consistent or not?
The vicious dingbat who shot some guy after a few huffy words waiting in line at a pizza joint could tell a very consistent story too, but I can’t see how he is innocent under any ‘stand your ground’ law.
Zimmerman was told not to follow the guy, Zimmerman did not take the simplest common sense steps to defuse the situation. That evidence is consistent too, and is more important that Zimmerman’s story about how the fight went down.
Linnaeus
Scared, my ass – at least not scared in the way Zimmerman wants us to believe. He saw his chance to hunt someone down and he did it.
Southern Beale
There are more holes in George Zimmerman’s story than a slice of Swiss cheese.
I hope the Florida jury isn’t so dumb that they buy it.
leeleeFL
From your mouth to the FSM’s ears as they say..@Southern Beale:
MomSense
All I can think about is what this must be like for Trayvon’s Mom and Dad. I am heartbroken and angry and just praying that Zimmerman does not get away with this.
DCLaw1
@Spaghetti Lee:
In fairness, the “stand your ground law” has no bearing on this case, which actually centers around pretty standard self defense rules. Under Zimmerman’s own account of what happened, “stand your ground” would not make a difference because he allegedly had no ability to flee anyway.
I think it’s important for everyone to keep in mind that the determining legal issue here is Zimmerman’s state of mind at the moment he shot Martin, not when he started following the young man.
Chris
@Spaghetti Lee:
Of all the misnomers Republicans apply to their party, “tough on crime” might just be the biggest one.
@Southern Beale:
FTFY.
Although I suppose there’s a connection there…
Ted & Hellen
@jl:
Coherently, concisely, and well stated.
Ted & Hellen
This thread is sure to be a completely unbiased and objective discussion of the Zimmerman trial.
I mean, I know, right? Where does that fucker Zimmerman get off having a consistent story and all that shit?
DCLaw1
Also: Zimmerman cannot take refuge in the self-defense doctrine if he initiated the actual physical altercation (as opposed to the initial confrontation). If the extent of his aggression was simply that he followed Martin, or even said something like “what are you doing in my neighborhood,” even though that may make him a racist a-hole, it is not enough to negate a self-defense claim if Martin initiated the physical altercation and Zimmerman reasonably feared Martin would kill or severely injure him.
? Martin
You do if you have a gun you’re hoping to use.
Marc
@Ted & Hellen:
Hating the locals so much that you’re rooting for a vigilante murderer to provoke them is pretty pathetic.
Ted & Hellen
@leeleeFL:
lol
Betty Cracker
Does anyone know why the state entered Zimmerman’s taped reenactment of the alleged scuffle into evidence? From what I’ve heard (possibly erroneous; I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know), the defense couldn’t have submitted that without exposing Z to having to testify. But now the jury got to hear his version from his own mouth without him being exposed to cross examination. Wasn’t that a mistake?
lojasmo
@Spaghetti Lee:
Your progressive better™, Ted & Helen would like a word with you.
Ted & Hellen
@Linnaeus:
You should notify the prosecution that you were an eye witness. They will want to know.
And also, your gift for mind reading may be valuable on Cold Case.
Ted & Hellen
@DCLaw1:
Fuck you man.
We don’t need you coming in here with your details about “law” and the “meanings” of laws and all that bullshit.
Zimmerman needs to fry…full stop.
I can’t even…
Ted & Hellen
@DCLaw1:
You’re a fucking racist, man.
Brian R.
@Ted & Hellen:
I love how you keep posting here. No one gives a shit what you think.
What a sad, pathetic lonely life you must lead.
Ted & Hellen
@Marc:
Another eye witness!
Litlebritdifrnt
From what I understand when Zimmerman gave his statement to the police right after the shooting he kept referring to Trevon as “the suspect” the prosecution has basically run with this and said that Zimmerman “profiled” Travon by judging him to be a “suspect” simply because he was a black teenager walking around a gated community at night. The questioning by the prosecution to the police officer today was “how do you describe someone suspected of a crime” police officer “the suspect” Travon wasn’t a suspect, he was a kid walking back to his Dad’s house after buying iced tea and skittles at the convenience store. Zimmerman saw him as “a suspect”, he profiled the kid, he made up his mind that Travon was a criminal, and he made sure that this one did not “get away”. Murder. Pure and simple.
? Martin
@Betty Cracker:
Not if the state believes they can show strong contradictions to his reenactment from other evidence. Then it makes him look like a liar, and that puts pressure on him to take the stand.
Yatsuno
@Brian R.: Timmeh is paid to post here. It’s twue! Just ask him!
EDIT: he does make a lot of pie though.
Ted & Hellen
@Brian R.:
Pretty happy, actually!
The lulz I get from the tribal circle jerk here brings bonus merriment.
Thanks for your well wishes.
Ted & Hellen
@Yatsuno:
It’s true!
lojasmo
@DCLaw1:
Bullshit.
DCLaw1
@Ted & Hellen: As a lawyer, I’ve been finding the case immensely fascinating from a criminal law and procedure point of view. And we should never forget that the first order of trials is to determine what happened (to the extent it can be determined), and to fit the law to those facts. While my sympathies were with Martin from the beginning, I can’t blind myself to where the facts may lead, and I believe in the criminal standard of proof: beyond a reasonable doubt – particularly when we are talking about a potential life sentence.
Ted & Hellen
@Litlebritdifrnt:
Please call the prosecution TOMORROW! And the judge will want to know. We can call the rest of this silly trial business off and make a weary nation aware that you simply KNOW.
What a relief. Our suffering is over.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Betty Cracker:
IMO (as a paralegal not a lawyer)I think the prosecution introduced it because Zimmerman kept referring to Travon as “the suspect” he had tried and convicted Travon in his own mind, he was just doing his civic duty by executing him.
Ted & Hellen
@DCLaw1:
My only question to you sir, is: Why do you hate Trayvon Martin and his family?
And how long have you been a stone cold racist…full stop?
Brian R.
@Yatsuno:
If you ever needed to disprove the theory of a beneficent deity, Braindead and Hellen is Exhibit A.
bk
The prosecution is doing a terrible job.
Brian R.
@Ted & Hellen:
Christ, that is just sad.
Ted & Hellen
@Litlebritdifrnt:
Brilliant analysis!
There is no doubt in my mind that you are correct. Zimmerman should be tortured to death tomorrow. We don’t need no stinkin’ due process, goddammit.
DCLaw1
@lojasmo: Please read my full comment. I wrote, “Under Zimmerman’s own account of what happened….” Do you know why I wrote that? Because a defense based on “stand your ground” must be mounted by (drumroll) the defense. So my point was that even from the defendant’s own account, “stand your ground” would make no difference.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Ted & Hellen:
a) Fuck off
b) I am a paralegal, I work for a very well respected criminal defense attorney and I have for 14 years. While you spout your fucking shit on this board day in and day out I live it every single day and it is my job to look at the evidence and come to a conclusion. You on the other hand push your bullshit having no idea how the law works. Please proceed you fucking moron.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Brian R.: I would suggest training yourself to first, not answer him, and then not even read his posts. They’re pointless. Now, obviously, starving him does not work, but it’s not worth the effort.
Ted & Hellen
@bk:
Maybe, but we know that Rachel was credible and comported herself well. Her story is rock solid. I mean, who doesn’t know that noise that wet grass makes?
Ted & Hellen
@Litlebritdifrnt:
I’ll have you know that I am a part time receptionist at Star Trek Command.
Joel
@Ted & Hellen: Christ man, give it a rest. Have a zoloft.
DCLaw1
@? Martin: I didn’t see enough material contradictions in Zimmerman’s accounts for that, alone, to be a good enough reason for the prosecution to put them out there for the jury. Unless there’s a strategic element beyond that I’ve overlooked, I think it was a blunder. Ironically, it may have decreased the odds of Zimmerman testifying, because the substance of his defense is now fully known to the jury, and it didn’t seem to suffer any fatal contradictions.
bk
@Ted & Hellen: I’m expressing my opinion as an attorney. If I want any shit from you, I’ll squeeze your head.
Cassidy
@Brian R.: @Belafon (formerly anonevent): You also gotta remember that it’s a lonely, bitter thing that can only get emotional contact here by picking a fight. It’s a boring broken record with a worn out schtick of trying to say the most insulting things possible to get an emotional fix.
Brian R.
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Good advice. The voices in his head will provide plenty of conversation for him.
Cassidy
@Litlebritdifrnt: Don’t get worked up. It plays with crayons for a living.
scav
@Ted & Hellen: That’s far more likely than you being a reasonably tolerable human, parent or artist.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Ted & Hellen:
Have you ever been on the stand? In front of jurors? Trying to remember what happened a year ago? When your first language isn’t English? And you had to witness your friend being murdered while you were talking to him on the phone? You have? Good. Please explain how you are so in tune with her testimony.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Cassidy:
Yeah I know it just admitted to being a receptionist at Star Fleet, at this point I have to accept that it is a CosPlay freak who dresses up as the “ensign who always gets killed on the first away team” deal. I really shouldn’t poke it.
DCLaw1
What’s depressing to me is that this case has broken out into such a stark liberal-conservative divide, such that if the outcome is an acquittal — even if it is the proper outcome based on the facts — the right will take it as a “victory” and the left will presume a grave injustice has occurred. So maddening.
Betty Cracker
@? Martin: Well, from what I saw, nothing the state gleaned in the way of inconsistencies outweighed the benefit to the defense of having Z provide his version on tape without risk of cross-examination. I saw some analysts saying Z’s use of “suspect” was a huge strike against him, but the cop who asked Z to write the report said neither she nor Z knew Martin’s name at that point and that it’s common for cops to call people they suspect of criminal intent “suspects,” which could serve to mitigate that point in the jurors’ minds.
I dunno. Personally, I hope Z does serious time for pursuing and killing an unarmed kid. But the state’s case is looking like shit so far in my opinion.
Ted & Hellen
@scav:
lulz
David in NY
Funny, you know what the prosecutors say when their witness gets caught in little contradictions — “You know, if he were lying, he’d have made it all consistent.” This time, they might be right.
Luthe
@Litlebritdifrnt: The answer is 3.14. As in Cleek’s pie filter. *sees nothing but trolls with a love for baked desserts*
Ted & Hellen
@Litlebritdifrnt:
Again, I beg you, ALL of you who were there that night and saw all that went down: CALL the prosecution’s office and tell them what you know.
For the love of god, how can you be a part of setting Zimmerman free?
As for Rachel, I said she comported herself well. What the fuck more do you want?
DCLaw1
@Betty Cracker: Agreed in every regard except Zimmerman necessarily going to jail for a long time. I don’t think there’s enough evidence thus far, beyond a reasonable doubt, for second degree murder.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Betty Cracker:
Betty he called Travon a “suspect” because he thought Travon had committed a crime, and in Zimmerman’s mind he had, he was walking while black in a gated community, “these fuckers always get away” Travon was a black teenager walking around in a gated community where he didn’t belong. Zimmerman made a judgment, “these fuckers always get away”, he tried, convicted and executed a black kid.
Litlebritdifrnt
@Ted & Hellen:
Captain Picard has a call holding on line one, get on it.
Ted & Hellen
@Litlebritdifrnt:
And you know all this went on in Z’s mind…how…?
Ash Can
@Ted & Hellen:
I don’t know if it qualifies as that, but once in a while a nice piece of fresh fruit pie and a cup of coffee does make a nice breakfast. Beats heck out of a doughnut, anyway.
Ted & Hellen
@Litlebritdifrnt:
Oh my…I NEVER keep Captain P waiting…
Betty Cracker
@Litlebritdifrnt: Possibly it went down exactly as you described, but just looking at how the evidence is being presented, I’m concerned that the state is blowing this case. I’m no lawyer, though.
Ted & Hellen
@Betty Cracker:
Or, you know, possibly it didn’t go down that way at all…
DCLaw1
@Betty Cracker:
You don’t have to be a lawyer to see that. But in fairness, I think the prosecution was dealt a weak case to begin with. I can sort of see why they didn’t want to prosecute at first. Not that they ruled out the possibility that it was genuine self-defense, but there’s a difference between what you believed may have happened and what you can prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
Cacti
@Ted & Hellen:
On a scale of 1-10, how much personal pain did it cause you when Jerry Sandusky was found guilty as charged?
lojasmo
@Ted & Hellen:
Sever your internet connection forever,
DCLaw1
I think investigator Chris Serino (who testified today) had the best assessment of this case: manslaughter. That is, Zimmerman acted in self-defense, but with disproportionate (lethal) force.
Ted & Hellen
@lojasmo:
Oh lojism…always asking me for more than I have to give… :(
Ted & Hellen
@DCLaw1:
No. Full stop.
It was murder. Cold blooded, premeditated murder.
We KNOW this.
Cacti
I predicted from the start that Zimmerman would walk. My mind hasn’t changed.
Even in “post-racial America”, the shooter will always be given the benefit of the doubt by law enforcement where the dead guy is black and the shooter isn’t.
Jay in Oregon
In response to Zandar’s comment on the Twittertrons:
https://twitter.com/ZandarVTS/statuses/351859282301550592
It’s one part projection and two parts wish fulfillment. As Atrios says, not every gun owner fantasizes about killing someone with their gun, but pretty much every gun nut does.
They want the “race war” so they can shoot themselves some niCLANGs and be declared heroes for doing it.
Ted & Hellen
@Jay in Oregon:
So if it goes Zimmerman’s way, do you really expect Rodney King-level riots?
Jay in Oregon
@Jay in Oregon:
(Yeah, I’m responding to myself, but the site won’t let me edit my comment.)
That also explains why so many of them want Zimmerman to get off; he got to live the dream and if he gets locked up for it, then that means it could happen to them, too.
Cacti
@Jay in Oregon:
Is there any other explanation for Zimmerman becoming the official mascot of Faux News other than he got to dispatch a negro buck with his trusty peacemaker?
A Humble Lurker
Wasn’t Ted the one saying Martin’s mom was going to use the situation to grift when the story broke? Back when he was Clime Acts? My, my, how his thoughts on prejudgement have changed since then.
Also, you seemed to give a LOT of benefit of the doubt to Sandusky as well as Zimmerman. But not a bit for their victims, or if you like, their alleged victims. Funny.
Betty Cracker
@DCLaw1: Zimmerman perfectly exemplifies the dangers of allowing officious little pricks to run around in public with guns. Innocent people end up dead.
signifyingmnky
@Betty Cracker:
State of mind. The defense has argued that Zimmerman shot Martin out of fear of losing his life. The prosecution, clearly in my opinion is arguing that Zimmerman’s mind was not at all on fear of Trayvon, but on stopping a criminal that Zimmerman had already tried and convicted in his own mind.
“F’ing punks. They always get away”
“The suspect”
“He looks like he’s on drugs”
“Something wrong with him”
Zimmerman ignored police advisement not to follow Martin not out of fear of him, but because he thought Martin was another criminal who was going to get away. He never considered another possibility.
If you want to sink Zimmerman’s argument that he killed Martin out of fear of his life, you argue that his mind wasn’t on fear, but on taking the law into his own hands.
IMO, it’s a waste to look for smoking gun inconsistencies. We know he shot Martin, and we know from his own words and actions that he intended to stop Martin rather than wait for police as he was advised.
Cacti
@signifyingmnky:
Oh, there are inconsistencies aplenty. They just don’t fit the narrative and the narrative must be served.
#1: I was screaming for help vs. that doesn’t even sound like me vs. his hands were smothering me and I couldn’t breathe.
#2: He came from behind some (non-existent) bushes vs. It was so dark, I don’t know where he came from
#3: He started circling my truck vs. No mention of this to 911 dispatcher
#4: He pinned my arms down vs. being able to draw his gun, turn off the safety, and fire a shot
patroclus
I’ll admit that I haven’t been riveted to the TV and watched every second of the trial, but from what I’ve seen, I think that all the lawyers are terrible, the judge isn’t particularly good and the witnesses seem bad too. And the reason, to me at least, is because of the way the media is covering the trial; with wall-to-wall national coverage by every news channel, each covering it like it’s a political game of some kind, with endless analysis of virtually every single phrase spoken by all the actors. I’m not a criminal lawyer, but this seems to me like a classic Sheppard v. Maxwell situation which should have resulted in a change of venue, a sequestered jury and a ban on TV. But it didn’t, so we’re stuck with the sensationalism. If justice results, I will be amazed.
At this point, I predict a hung jury and a mistrial.
Groucho48
@Ted & Hellen:
The white woman who testified the day before also talked about the sound of sneakers in wet grass and no one, and I mean no one, sneered at her.
Mnemosyne
@Groucho48:
Well, to be fair, walking on cement sounds exactly the same as walking on grass, right? No difference at all.
Ted & Hellen
@Mnemosyne:
I don’t see what any of this has to do with your vagina.
Mnemosyne
@Ted & Hellen:
Again, not really understanding your obsession with my vagina.
trollhattan
Special Timmeh has the keyboard tremens tonight, I see. Anyway, Zimms has already hung himself.
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/trayvon-martin-trial-quote-police-interview
Boy, I sure love the idea of armed “neighborhood watch.” Who came up with that brilliant scheme?
Ted & Hellen
@trollhattan:
Be sure to let the court know in the morning, so that they can cancel the rest of the trial and kill Zimmerman.
TooManyJens
@trollhattan:
Zimmerman, pretty much. AFAIK, nobody was encouraging neighborhood watch people to carry. But Zimmerman fancied himself a coulda-been, shoulda-been cop.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
@? Martin:
Not if the state believes they can show strong contradictions to his reenactment from other evidence.
Such as, to take one possibility, a suspicious lack of gunshot residue from the “point-blank” shot Zimmerman claimed he made while rolling on the ground with Martin…
I can see a damned good reason for letting Zimmerman dig a hole with his mouth good and deep before going to more objective contradictory evidence.
Groucho48
@Mnemosyne:
It’s kind of like quantum physics, where the observer affects the experiment. If the observer is black and talks funny, then, there is no special sound of wet grass. If the observer is white and articulate, then, of course the sound of wet grass is distinctive.
trollhattan
@Ted & Hellen:
Is this a capital prosecution? I am not aware of it, if so.
Ted & Hellen
@trollhattan:
Doesn’t matter..they should just kill him for lulz.
trollhattan
@Ted & Hellen:
Is that a Florida option? Because for once, we agree.
TNTDevil
@Betty Cracker: The video does reveal some interesting inconsistencies. 1) He’s wearing bandages but, there’s no swelling or bruising. It’s common knowledge that if someone lands a pretty solid blow to your nose, even if it doesn’t break, it’s gonna swell and your gonna get bruising in your cheeks. 2) The bandages on the back of his head…those are “fingertip” bandages and, wouldn’t be used by medical professionals (with the exception of “last option”) for those types of lacerations. There was definitely no noticeable swelling to the back of his head and there didn’t appear to any signs of medical attention (shaving the wounded area, infection prevention, etc.) In short, the entire “he was ‘slamming’ my head on concrete” seems shaky and the mis-applied bandages appear, to me (obviously), to be props in an attempt to cover his murderous tracks.
As other folks have pointed out, I think this entire affair stems from one simple act- Zimmerman exiting his vehicle in pursuit of Mr. Martin, ignoring the law professional’s request. None of this occurs if Mr. Zimmerman remains in his vehicle.
TNTDevil
@TooManyJens: Neighborhood Watch, the organization, expressly forbids carrying weapons and advises against tracking “suspicious” people.
Ted & Hellen
@TNTDevil:
That is awesome. When was it that you did this hands-on medical examination of Zimmerman? You should let the prosecution know immediately.
Gian
If I recall correctly, this whole mess started because there was a recommendation from an investigating officer with the prosecutor to file, and a decision initially not to file.
The original decision not to file a case could’ve been for more than one reason. The prosecutors thought they couldn’t prove the case at the reasonable doubt standard based on the evidence they had. Or they acted out of racism consciously or unconsciously. You had people resigning over the initial decision not to file.
that said, I’ve not watched the case, but from the defense antics described, what I see is a defense attorney trying to get a jury to focus on the lawyer, not the client. And the prosecutor goes to trial with the evidence he has not the evidence he wishes he has (unless he’s Nancy Grace and has some ethical issues)
from what I’ve read on the case it seems like an unlawful killing to me, but getting it to rise to the level of a murder over manslaughter is tough. I think the jury will hear an argument from the defense that while yes Zimmerman went out with a gun, and yes he followed him, he didn’t do those things with the malice required for it to be a murder, I expect some variation of “do murderers call 911 before they commit murder and ask for police to come?” to be part of the argument.
the counter will be that it only takes a split second to form malice, and Zimmerman got angry and had the required malice when he started talking about punks always getting away with it, and that he armed himself, followed the eventual victim of the homicide and initiated the confrontation…
Hell if I know what a jury will do with it. If they come up with a compromise verdict on manslaughter and Zimmerman gets something like 10 years…. how will people react?
and how with Zimmerman’s prior brushes with the law was he able to legally own a gun in the first damn place? didn’t he have a domestic violence history? In florida I guess that’s not a bar to buying a gun.
TNTDevil
@Ted & Hellen: I used my sooper-seekret Tom Frist Teevee Medical Decoder Ring ©.
And as I explained, but you couldn’t comprehend, that’s why the Prosecution introduced the tape- to expose the jury to yet more discrepancies in Mr. Zimmerman’s testimony.
Oh, and if the beating was as furious as Mr. Zimmerman attests, to escape without a scratch is pretty impressive. And I don’t need a medical examination to know as much.
AHH onna Droid
@Betty Cracker: That is complete crap. I live not far from you. An unknown person is called a SUBJECT, not a suspect.
AHH onna Droid
@DCLaw1: When bodies are found, horribly beaten and shot, were all what a heinous murder, esp if female. But if the perp tells hispolice buddies a good enough bullshit story it’s just a big misunderstanding? Plenty of murder victims fight for their lives. That is why they lookfor dna under finger nails, transfer fibers, and injuries on suspects.
Steve J.
Elon – thanx for posting this. As I recall, Zimmerman wasn’t wearing anything that had “neighborhood watch” clearly visible.
Betty Cracker
@AHH onna Droid: I’m merely repeating the police woman’s sworn testimony. According to her, it’s common for cops to use the term “suspect” in that situation. I’m not sure what your alleged proximity to my location has to do with anything, but feel free to look up the testimony of the cop.
signifyingmnky
@Betty Cracker:
Zimmerman isn’t an officer of the law, and Martin had committed no crime. Why would suspect be considered acceptable language for Zimmerman to describe Martin?
If it’s common for police to describe an unidentified gunshot victim who has not been found to have connected with any crime a suspect, we have a rather large problem with law enforcement in this country.
S-Cargo
Yesterday the defense attorney asked the lead investigator, does Zimmerman’s story deviate from the known facts of the case in any way? He replied no. I was kind of puzzled because earlier they played the initial interview with Zimmerman. With the 911 tape playing in the background the investigator is asking Zimmerman, you said he was smothering you and you were losing consciousness just before you shot him. Who’s screaming in this tape? You? Him? Why is he screaming? You said he was on top of you. *Gunshot* When were you being smothered George? I’m trying to help you out here, George. When was his hand over your mouth preventing you from breathing?
Gave me chills.
Betty Cracker
@signifyingmnky: Again, this is coming from the police woman who testified yesterday. She said cops use the term “suspect” to describe unidentified people whom they suspect of criminal intent if they don’t know the person’s name, whether or not the person is ultimately found guilty — or apparently killed by some irresponsible asshole with a gun.
My point is that the defense may have successfully mitigated any damage done by Zimmerman’s use of the word “suspect” on cross-examination. They got the police investigator, whose testimony the jury will probably be inclined to believe, to say the use of “suspect” in that context is common.
It doesn’t have to make sense to us or be appropriate: All it has to do is create doubt about the state’s case.