The Zimmerman Trial

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


You know, I think I heard about that stiory, but yes, U2U me the link, I would love to read it.

I read the letter to Rachael. Not sure if she has seen it, but if it was literally mailed to her, it may not be a goid thing. I believe she is still considered a witness, aubject to re-call, and must behave as one. Ie: no discussing the trial.

The one thing that ran through my mind the entire time I read the letter was,

"I only called back once. I thought it was just another fight."

Both testimony, and in the cursive letter to Sybrina.

www.allvoices.com...

However, her phone logs belie the testimony, as many calls from her phone continued throughout the night and the next day, according to testimony in court. If she only called back once, who else was using her phone?

Could it have been the same person texting and talking to him 400 minutes the day he died?

reply to post by Libertygal


Thank you. I will scope it out as soon as I'm not on my phone/on an actual pc.

And if you meant u2u the article on my friends friend's self defense case I will. I wasn't sure if that's what you meant since I think I mentioned it in a reply to TK, but I would gladly send it to you as well, if I can find it once I have access to the computer again.

reply to post by Libertygal


I had a feeling the defense would be calling her back the second she was "finished" earlier in the trial. I was thinking " no way they aren't going to keep on that. She was close to coming out with the true story, I think."

I also thought it was a different girl that Trayvon was talking to. I could have sworn I saw the girl on tv a year or so ago, but when I saw rachel I was like "who is this." Maybe that was in my mind, or some re enactment (I don't really think it was that though).

Let me know what you think of that letter. If she wins any awards for that I am giving up writing.

Like govts, you get the media and entertainment industries you deserve. Nobody is forced to listen to the Glen Becks and Nancy Grace's of the world. There's this thing called teh interwebs now, and you don't have to take your information in bite-sized lumps anymore, you can go straight to the store, get a full pie and eat it in your own time.

Blaming some liberal media conspiracy as the reason George got arrested just creates more smoke, helping to obscure the fact that there were considerable mistakes made by SPD in the handling of this teen's death, and however the state handles it now, guilty verdict or not, this runaway train is not slowing down.

reply to post by Libertygal

Do you accept that Trayvon was on the phone to someone, but just not the person in court testifying it was her?

As to this bit in the letter she claims to have had written out for her, why add something so negative to a narrative that is meant to be so agenda-driven?

"I only called back once. I thought it was just another fight."

I can't proclaim to know anything about the dynamic between Rachel and Ttayvon, but I can imagine how she was the more insecure about the relationship. I can also imagine there were several occasions when their phone communication cut out, or Trayvon didn't answer, where she imagined Trayvon was playing her for a fool and thought, "Go on, play your silly boy games, Trayvon!" Maybe she wasn't even entirely convinced of the seriousness of the situation when the phone cut out, and that's why she never continued trying to contact him?

My point is, why assume the worst about this person when you don't even know her? Okay, I get that some people don't like Sharpton, Jackson, Crump, et al, but why tranfer that dislike to people who are at best, pawns in their chess games?

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


As someone looking in from the outside, whose strongest opinion of your current prez is "He's not quite plumbed the depths of the last guy", I just saw his press statement as a message to the State of Florida's law and order bunch reminding them that the world were now watching their actions. Of course he was going to mention Trayvon. That's who the story was about, not George. Did you expect him to add a "Oh, and btw, you Go George. Keep up that great NW work"?

reply to post by Libertygal

We’ll discuss how manslaughter differs from murder 2, and how such a shift might play out in this trial, in a future post.

I looked through many pages there but couldn't find it. Maybe it did not get written.

Originally posted by roadgravel
reply to post by Libertygal

 

We’ll discuss how manslaughter differs from murder 2, and how such a shift might play out in this trial, in a future post.

I looked through many pages there but couldn't find it. Maybe it did not get written.

I posted this many pages ago ... too much on these pages to go looking for it .... Florida Statues on 2nd Degree Murder and Manslaughter

MURDER 2

The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life ….

MANSLAUGHER

The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree …

www.wftv.com...

For those interested ... live stream with blog from courtroom reporters .....
Defense kicks off at 8:45 AM today ....

reply to post by FlyersFan

Not what we were looking for. Thanks though.

Originally posted by roadgravel
Not what we were looking for. Thanks though.

Okay. Nevermind. I thought it was and I thought I was being helpful.

Start for court this AM has been pushed to 9:00.
Some interesting depositions happened yesterday.... so that could spice things up today.

ETA ... the talking heads just said to expect up to 23 witness called for the defense.
They expect 3-4 days of testimony. The case could go to Jury by Friday. That's an estimate.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Would you say shooting someone in the heart when you are no longer being hit, and have supposedly already resisted the attempts of your attacker to gain control of your gun, is an act of ill will? What about if you are holding onto their clothing while they try to pull away and you fire?

A reasonable man, with the benefit of hindsight, would realise that he had been unreasonable by even putting himself into such a situation, and would feel a mixture of anger and sympathy toward the dead teen if they didn't mean to kill him. Zimmerman hasn't said he didn't mean to kill Trayvon. He hasn't said he panicked, or it was an accident. He said he killed him deliberately because he feared for his life, and because he's a reasonable person, we should all believe him. All the prosecutor has to prove beyond doubt is that George is a liar and far from reasonable and no fair jury in the land would fail to convict him. The prosecution doesn't need an onlooker's photo of George being on top of Trayvon when he fired his fatal shot - although they'd fully appreciate such a thing - they just need to put enough reasonable doubt into the juries minds over the snapshots the defence presents.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Would you say shooting someone in the heart when you are no longer being hit, and have supposedly already resisted the attempts of your attacker to gain control of your gun, is an act of ill will?

1 - Martin was on top of Zimmerman pounding on him. (John Good Eyewitness Testimony)
2 - There is no proof that Martin was 'no longer hitting Zimmerman'. You just made that up.
3 - OF COURSE Zimmerman was resisting being hit. Who wouldn't. He was being hit for a while.
4 - Zimmerman shot in self defense and hit the largest part of the body that was ontop of him .... That is Martins chest. And in the chest is .... the heart.

It's not Murder 2. Negligent homicide could come in play. But not Murder 2. It's just not there.

The only person at MSNBC who had his head screwed on right .. IMHO ...

ABC Dan Abrams Predicts Acquittal in Zimmerman Trial

ABC Chief Legal Affairs Anchor and Mediaite founder Dan Abrams told Good Morning America on Saturday that the prosecution in the Zimmerman trial had failed to make its case for convicting George Zimmerman beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the jury had little legal basis to anything but acquit.

“The prosecution’s case is now in,” Abrams said. “They’ve presented all of their evidence. I do not see how the jury, as a legal matter, convicts of either second degree murder or manslaughter.””

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Libertygal

 

I had a feeling the defense would be calling her back the second she was "finished" earlier in the trial. I was thinking " no way they aren't going to keep on that. She was close to coming out with the true story, I think."

I also thought it was a different girl that Trayvon was talking to. I could have sworn I saw the girl on tv a year or so ago, but when I saw rachel I was like "who is this." Maybe that was in my mind, or some re enactment (I don't really think it was that though).

Let me know what you think of that letter. If she wins any awards for that I am giving up writing.

I thought it was a different girl too.

...convicts of either second degree murder or manslaughter

Noting this...supports the idea of auto inclusion of manslaughter. We will see if it can be considered.

reply to post by FlyersFan


1. He can't be sure of what he saw, and the reason he has stepped back from his intial "mma-style pounding" nonsense is because he saw nothing of the sort. If Trayvon had really beaten George to the level he claims when Good came to his porch doors and totally ignored his desperate plight, by the time Good got upstairs to get a safer look, Trayvon would have had his fight won if he was half the thug he's being painted as. George has to be the most incompent fighter in the world for 40 seconds and then totally turn the tables in an instant, and reasonable people aren't buying it.

2. There's no proof that Trayvon ever hit anyone. See above. The only"independent" witness is unsure, and George is a liar.

3. Erm... actually, if you listen to his own story, he wasn't doing very much at all, besides a little shimmying to slide away from the pavement. Not once did he attempt to hit Trayvon back. Not once does he mention trying to throw his much lighter attacker off him.

4. HOW it happened is pure assertion. All you have to back this up is Zimmerman's own words and we know what they are worth.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by roadgravel

 

Yeah.. but this was a very strange thing for a president to comment on. Especially the way he did and it definitely seemed rooted race. Very weird for a president to take a side on an issue like this (especially before the facts are in).

Should be thrown out for that reason alone.

Side note ... I want to know what happened when CRUMP was deposed .....

DEFENSE STARTS ...

Defense witness on the stand ... .Sondra Osterman. Wife of Zimmerman friend who is a Federal Air Marshall. She became friends with Zimmerman. Sounds like she is a character witness. She says she worked with 'Georgie' every day. She's best friends with Zimmermans wife. She knows Zimmermans voice ... in person and over the phone. She's heard him talking, laughing and frustrated over years.

She hasn't been allowed contact because of the case but still considers him a friend.
She says she wouldn't lie for anyone ... not Zimmerman, not anyone.

Defense plays 911 tape with screaming in background.
She ID's the screaming in the tape as Zimmermans.
She's in tears .. not hysterical .. but in tears.

PROSECUTION REBUTTAL of Sondra Osterman

Defense objects to the prosecution bringing up a book that she co-wrote about Zimmerman.
Judge rules for prosecution ... of course.
Money from the book went to the Zimmerman defense fund.
Prosecution says she 'has a stake' in what happens to Zimmerman.

She said she immediately knew it was Zimmermans voice on the 911 tape.
She heard it on the TV News a few times.

Prosecution plays a garbled tape to try to get the defense witness to ID it ...
She IDs the voice as Zimmermans. Prosecution scolds the witness for saying 'Georgie'
instead of Mr. Zimmerman ...

She admits she's never heard Zimmerman scream before ....