The Zimmerman Trial

reply to post by IvanAstikov

Comeon .. we know for a fact that Martin was pounding Zimmerman. Eye Witness John Good ... the beat up head of Zimmerman ... the neighbor who couldn't ID Zimmerman said it was because his voice was too beat up. Just deal with the fact ... Martin was beating on Zimmerman ... and we don't know who started the fight.

So, she "didn't hear" George say "(expletive deleted) punks"? Sounds like selective hearing to me. Possible she's hearing what she wants to hear. She doesn't think he was angry... She's showing herself as VERY biased, IMO

How do you get a fair trial when the president of the United states finds you guilty on public television and the MSM alters the news to sway public opinion?
whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com...

Prosecution is now giving the witness a very hard time and the sound of his voice is very gruff and raised. You can tell the prosecution is frustrated. He's trying to trip up the defense witness. She has a gentle demeanor.

Defense objects to the line of questioning.
Judge goes with the Prosecution. (again)

The Prosecution, in a raised voice, tells the defense witness that "she's speculating, about Zimmermans state of mind, right" and her response was "I guess we both are".

Prosecution is again playing the tape with the cuss words .... like for the third time ... for this witness. She isn't sure about hearing the cuss words. Prosecution asks if she can hear that Zimmerman is out of breath from running on the tape ... she says she can't hear it. Prosecution gets frustrated.

Defense witness says that Zimmermans cuss words didn't sound angry or hateful.
Prosecution is still frustrated.

(listening to the whole tape again ... Zimmermans call to dispatch ..... he doesn't sound angry at all)

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
How do you get a fair trial when the president of the United states finds you guilty on public television and the MSM alters the news to sway public opinion?
whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com...

You hope the jurors are more reasonable people then those just mentioned.

The defense is asking the witness if she heard any 'ill will or spite or hatred' in his voice.
This is key. That's what is needed for Murder 2.
Honestly, I've heard that tape a bunch of times and I heard no raised voice or hate tensions.

(unlike the prosecution this morning ... which absolutely has frustration in his voice)

seems like the prosecution, has dropped the ball again.
tried his damnest to trip her up. couldn't do it.

wanted her to say GZ was mad, and that he spoke that way when was he angry.
but it didn't happen and she stood her ground.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie
seems like the prosecution, has dropped the ball again.
tried his damnest to trip her up. couldn't do it.

I think he wanted to show her bias. He played the tape over and over, so the jury could hear the words he used and the frustration in his voice and asked her if she heard it... She insisted that no, he wasn't upset. If it's clear to the jury that he WAS upset, then they will conclude that she's just biased and not hearing the frustration in "Georgie's" voice.

reply to post by FlyersFan

I don't trust John Good as a man, based on his actions when one of 2 people was desperately pleading for help and he just turned his back and abdicated responsibility to the police, so why would I trust his perceptions on a dark, rainy evening? You're sticking to the belief that because he mentioned a mma-style beating in his first interview, then that is the truest representation of his experience, but that same standard leads to you having to believe George's first story that he was punched, fell on his back immediately and beaten where he landed.

Originally posted by Libertygal
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?

Wow!

Ya know, this is a very interesting point you have raised.

She did mention that she only called him back once, so there may very well be another "Dee Dee"/ ear-witness afterall.

Her comment about her feeling it was "just another fight" is very detrimental to the prosecution...

If you're in a tussle and you end up in a struggle for your gun that you lose, which gun is safer, the one which has 3 external safety switches, or the one that fires straight away?

ps. Osterman is explaining to everyone how George already had the mind of a cop after recieving all his wisdom.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


no i don't think so, did you notice that he changed his approach when she spanked him by saying that we are both speculating.

he knew he was coming off as being hostile towards her and changed his track and just asked basic questions.
knew if he kept on going the way he started she would keep firing back and the jury would get the wrong impression.

and if i saw it, i know the jury did.

DEFENSE CALLS - Mark Osterman again.

He's the buddy who wrote the book based on hearing the story from Zimmerman once or twice.
He was discredited previously because he admitted that he didn't take notes and that he wrote
the book based on his memories of the conversation.

Prosecution objects about concealed weapons permit discussion.
Judge actually rules for the defense.

Mark Osterman talks about Zimmerman going for his concealed gun permit and classes.
They went to shooting ranges together 8-10 times. They had discussions on fire arm safety.

Osterman is asked to discuss the differences in firearms .. competition, self defense, etc.
(He's an air marshall so he's supposed to understand this stuff)
He and Zimmerman chose the 9 mil for Zimmerman. No exterior safety is why they picked it.
This was picked for 'quick safety' and it's what law enforcement uses.
(this could go against Zimmerman ... IMHO)

Why they picked CalTec 9 mil ... reliable firearm. Without exterior safety. It was specially chosen in case someone gets into a scuffle .... (again .. could cause Zimmerman trouble .. like he expected to get into trouble).

He suggested to Zimmerman to keep one bullet loaded in the chamber because of the situations that Zimmerman could be in while walking around (as a neighborhood watch). THis man says he keeps 'one in the chamber' as is policy for law enforcement. He and George had more talks about how many bullets to have in a magazine, etc. How to have one extra round in addition to those in the magazine. (again .. this could be a problem for Zimmerman because it shows that he was trying to load up with bullets and it goes to the 'cop mentality' that the prosecution wants)

DEFENSE CONTINUES ...

Prosecution objects ... 'relevance' ... to the discussion about the fire arms and safety.
Judge rules for the prosecution .. of course.
More discussion on how Zimmerman should handle his weapon.
He says that they practiced shooting with both hands incase your primary hand can't shoot.

Witness says he has heard Zimmermans voice in many situations for many years.
Defense is playing the 911 call to hear the screams.
Witness says it's Zimmerman screaming.

(My note .. something about this guy doesn't sit well with me)

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Osterman is explaining to everyone how George already had the mind of a cop...

Yep. All this gun talk goes to the 'wanna be cop' thing.
The defense shouldn't have called this guy.
And he's already been discredited about the book thing ....

(something about this fella is creepy ... just my opinion)

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I answered that. I said that it really was between Zimmerman's mother and Trayvons father. The INITIAL answers. Zimmerman's mother and uncle have always said it was Zimmerman. Martins father heard the tape first and said it wasn't his son. Then the mother did and said it was.

My question has nothing to do with Trayvon's Father. I do not recall him ever taking the witness stand and testifying. Did I miss that?

What makes one more credible than the other? Well Zimmerman's mother had nothing to gain at the time.

I disagree, she had plenty to gain and still does. For starters, keeping her son out of Prison on a murder charge. She also has to think about her son's future. Look how high the tensions rose in Florida after the shooting. Look at the plans being made today in regards to riots and racial tensions. Just look at the death threats Zimmerman continues to receive to this day. To suggest that the Zimmerman family has nothing to gain is willful ignorance at the highest level.

however Martins parents (one of whom had changed his answer) had plans to sue the HOA for money AND they were trying to raise the awareness of the case (both to bring charges and to raise money). They turned Trayvon into a brand, if the voice is Zimmermans the brand is tarnished.

How crucial was the 911 audio tape in the HOA lawsuit? I am not familiar with that case, I do not know the details, but I would bet my left foot that the 911 tape had very little to do with that lawsuit at all. That being said, Zimmerman screaming for help does not tarnish "the brand", because no matter who was screaming it does not change the fact that Zimmerman was following Martin and had he not followed him he would be alive today.

You can debate this point with me if you like, but in my mind the issue of following is not debatable. How much testimony have we heard that Zimmerman wanted to keep a visual on Martin so he could tell Police where he was? Well guess what? You can't keep a visual on someone without following them to do it.

Also Zimmermans mother appears more credible as evidence seems to suggest it is Zimmerman screaming and therefore Trayvon's mom is lying.

edit on 7-7-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

So right off the bat you will call Trayvon's Mother a liar, but not for a second entertain the thought that maybe she is not lying but she is just wrong? This is the lamest answer you could have possibly given and I would suggest it is your bias which is the reason. You have taken every word Zimmerman has said and assumed it is true, not for one second entertaining the thought that Zimmerman is lying. Maybe he is not lying about the whole story, but perhaps just parts of it. Perhaps just embellishing enough to paint himself as the victim who was simply defending himself, but the fact that can not be changed in this whole thing is that if Zimmerman was not following this kid he would never have been in a position to defend himself to begin with.

Originally posted by ButterCookie
Her comment about her feeling it was "just another fight" is very detrimental to the prosecution...

The legal talking heads say that Jeantel may be recalled by the defense sometime this week.
And yes .. her saying 'it's just another fight' so she wasn't uptight about it is VERY telling ...

And the prosecution is going after my earlier point. No way would Z holster his gun if he thought Trayvon was still alive, armed or a threat... Great point for the state.

PROSECUTION CROSS EXAMINATION ...

He's asking the witness about when he'd shoot and when he'd holster. it's getting convoluted and I really can't follow what the questions are at this point.

Here it comes .... POLICE POLICY says to put one bullet in the chamber, not civilians - says the prosecutor. The witness agrees. (goes to the cop wanna-be attitude).

Prosecution is again getting uptight and voice is raised and he's frustrated.

Prosecution says there is a difference between what police can do and what citizens can do

(My opinion .. defense made a mistake in calling this fella)

The prosecutor seems to have a lot more energy today than any other day in the trial.

I think someone had a 'chat' with him this weekend to step up his game.