home

Zimmerman Trial: Rachael Jeantel Testifies

The court is about to resume testimony with Witness 8, aka "Dee Dee" aka Rachel Jeantel now on the stand.

I'll update with notes later, for now I'm just watching. Her direct was quite a show to watch. It's too fascinating to blog during it.

Cross is starting. You can watch here or at these links.

Our threads close at 200 comments. This one is full (although I haven't weeded out the inappropriate comments yet.) A new thread with analysis of Ms. Jeantel's testimony is here.

< Wednesday Open Thread | Rachel Jeantel: Court Antics and How Martin Profiled Zimmerman >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    ATTN: DON WEST (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Cylinder on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:57:04 PM EST
    GET TO THE POINT!!!

    You have the goods on this witness and you're bickering with a child over the scheduling of a deposition given months ago.

    He is getting caught up in the tiniest details. (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:58:02 PM EST
    I'm wondering if the jury is dozing.

    Parent
    I want him to keep going now (none / 0) (#20)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:09:21 PM EST
    She will look increasingly sympathetic.

    Parent
    West got off to a good start.... (none / 0) (#22)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:23:01 PM EST
    and I didn't think he started off too antagonistically, but he got bogged down for sure.

    Parent
    West is doing a great cross exam (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Payaso on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:01:23 PM EST
    He is patiently and methodically nailing down all the details.  She is an extremely difficult witness.

    Parent
    The witness (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by John Shaft on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:24:16 PM EST
    appears completely credible to me. I understand her wanting to be a minor & lying about her age. Who wants to be part of a murder investigation? Any young, black immigrant is going to be distrustful of the situation & not want to be involved. Plus, she is from a part of the world that deals with death in a way much different from this country.
    If anything I find her totally sympathetic & her story about Trayvon being followed has not changed from the beginning. I can see this young, black kid trying to lose the "cracker" that was following him, then being startled by the appearance of the creep & the ensuing struggle; all the result of G.Zimmerman stalking a seventeen year old.

    "...her story about Trayvon..." (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by citizenjeff on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:56:28 PM EST
    "...being followed has not changed from the beginning."

    But her story about what Trayvon said has changed. Moreover, she hasn't described the duration or manner of the supposedly big bad following. Following isn't a crime. Zimmerman had every right to observe, approach and speak to Martin.

    Parent

    "Zimmerman had every right...." (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:06:41 PM EST
    No. He didn't. A teenager who had done nothing wrong when GZ decided to play cop is dead. It might be acquittal-able, but GZ had no "right" to do what he did, at least on a moral level.

    Parent
    What is the beginning? (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by MikeB on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:21:36 PM EST
    Zimmerman talked immediately after the shooting. RJ waited almost 3 weeks. Are you talking about THAT beginning? How hard would it be to say something that matches the timeline when the first person she talked to was Crump?

    If the shoe were on the other foot - the defense has a witness who showed up 3 weeks later and has so far, been caught in two lies - you would give the same deference to that witness?

    Parent

    I look forward to Jeralyn's opinions on this .... (none / 0) (#24)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:29:36 PM EST
    ... testimony, and if she thinks West's style and personality is playing well to the jury.

    Parent
    She's second generation. (none / 0) (#54)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:21:57 PM EST
    She said she was born in Miami, and her mother is from Haiti and her father is from the Dominican Republic.

    Parent
    Okay (none / 0) (#113)
    by John Shaft on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:36:17 PM EST
    so she is second generation; she still was brought up in a home where there is a potential huge influence from Haitian & Dominican culture.  She obviously did not want to be involved from the beginning & maybe there is a reason behind that.
    I would question all the texting between the two of them - what was that about? However, it still stands that her story about her conversation w/ Trayvon has not changed.
    Even the manner in which she says to Trayvon "he could be a rapist" & the use of "white cracker a$$" adds credibility to her story, because that is the way young people talk.
    I can barely understand my nineteen year old niece & her friends when they talk.

    Parent
    Could be a rapist (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:15:46 PM EST
    I doubt a 6' 160 pound male youth with any sense at all of himself as strong and capable, much less one who regularly fought staged fights in "ducked off" places, would be concerned about being raped by a random stranger.  Her testimony in this regard, and most others, isn't credible.

    Parent
    I know two guys who were raped at that age (none / 0) (#163)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:20:43 PM EST
    and you'd never think it would happen to them based on their size and demeanor.  In the situation here we're talking about it being dark and rainy and there didn't appear to be any other people around.  Trayvon didn't know whether or not the stranger had a gun or other weapon on his person, so I'm not at all surprised that he might be afraid of someone he didn't know watching him.  That part of her story is entirely credible.

    Parent
    John, I agree that she grew up (none / 0) (#127)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:50:31 PM EST
    in a different culture. I was just trying to clarify that she is likely to have a French creole-speaking mother and a Spanish-speaking father, who may also speak English, of course. I thought there was a question of whether her mother was from French-speaking Haiti.

    Parent
    Not sure we are watching the same trial.. (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by Cashmere on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:45:42 PM EST
    Just my opinion.

    Definition of "colloquial"? (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:06:46 PM EST
    ...depends on your color/race/sex? I personally find the term "cracker" extremely offensive and racially divisive. Her behavior in court as well as what can be gathered from her testimony could be summed up with the attitude captured in that epithet. I also wondered why this judge in particular allowed the kinds of non-responsive, disrespectful personal comments by this witness whenever it suited her, although I understand why Mr West would not want to get into that by requesting admonishments.

    Ya (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:50:48 PM EST
    Oh absolutely cracker is derogatory.  I've been called it more than a few times, but it doesn't seem to piss anyone off.  I've heard it used often and wondered why nobody cared, but I think people just don't want to be confrontational, or that a "pass" is given because of history.  Which I guess is understandable to an extent, but I think it shows where the real biases lie when something like that is said.

    It does seem odd that GZ is constantly labeled a racist, but the only one to use a derogatory racial term was apparently TM.

    Parent

    Cracker is the N word for white people. (none / 0) (#39)
    by redwolf on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:21:03 PM EST
    When I was 14 I used to walk home from soccer practice. One of those days a couple of black guys drove up next to me, stopped and called me a fucking cracker before driving off.  I'd never heard the term before and I didn't know the pair so I took as the equivalent of calling a black person a "nigger".

    Parent
    more or less (none / 0) (#50)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:11:58 PM EST
    there are a whole group of people to whom it is a very ugly hurtful word.  I don't think any word could ever compare to Ni**er in terms of pure hatefulness. But to be called that as a little kid by a couple of older guys, that must have been scary.

    Parent
    Some people also say "Jew" (none / 0) (#56)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:25:45 PM EST
    with centuries of hate, and I'm sure the Irish have some hateful words for the British and vice versa.

    Parent
    yes, I should have added (none / 0) (#71)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:41:33 PM EST
    in the U.S.  I was thinking in terms of US history.

    Parent
    In the U.S., too (none / 0) (#111)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:35:16 PM EST
    White supremacists hate Jews as much as they hate black people. If you have some eye bleach handy, take a look at Stormfront.

    Different Americans have hated other Americans with great fury at different times. My father was Jewish and my mother was Irish-American. I guarantee that there have been Irish-Americans who spoke of the British with hate.

    White European-Americans have hated one another, depending on their national heritage. Then there's hatred of American Indians, Hispanics, Chinese, Japanese, gays, women, etc.


    Parent

    less or more (none / 0) (#137)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:58:28 PM EST
    Hatefulness is in the person saying the word, not the word itself.  Are you saying that blacks are not as fully capable of hatred towards others as non-blacks?

    Parent
    Bad to worse (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by msjpacke on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:23:37 PM EST
    This witness is not helping the prosecution. TM calls GZ a cracker and then a nigger (used as a hostile, not racial term). TM is painted as an angry young man. And she has that attitude as well.

    Her best statements are equivocal. "Get off, get off" is screamed by somebody, but normal voice comparison with screams over the phone? In any case, if GZ is winning fight, then why use gun?
    She has nothing to help with GZ's injuries, and following someone is not against Florida law.

    Clearly it will be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this altercation was mainly, let alone, entirely GZ's fault. If so, then the question is why, given his injuries, GZ does not have a credible self-defense/stand your ground claim.

    He had reason to be angry (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:45:43 PM EST
    He was being followed, for no good reason as far as he knew.

    Parent
    And GZ used hostile terms about (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:50:24 PM EST
    Martin on the phone as well.

    So what does that show?  I think it will all come down to Zimmerman's credibility, not that of any of these other witnesses.

    Parent

    Not according to his cousin (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by lily on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:52:53 PM EST
    TRAY'S BIG BRUH @RIP_TRAY9

    Cracka got madd kause he got dem bangaz put 2 em by a young nigga #RIPTRAY
    6:07 AM - 28 Feb 2012


    Parent

    as far as he knew (none / 0) (#161)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:19:55 PM EST
    You assume that, but with no good reason.

    Parent
    Neither are hostile terms (none / 0) (#45)
    by vicndabx on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:53:00 PM EST
    Some time spent with black youth, or blacks in the South in general would inform you better. Nonetheless, even if viewed as hostile, how should one be when followed by an unknown stranger? In the context of this case, were I on the jury, I would not be inclined to give that testimony much weight beyond what it implies, fear and mental preparation for a possible conflict.

    I will say lack of a black juror or two will nor help the prosecution, that's for sure.

    Parent

    bullshit (none / 0) (#73)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:48:02 PM EST
    Black youth hanging around using offensive language and pretending it is not offensive are not the arbiters of what is or is not acceptable.  Good lord.
    Maybe I have misunderstood you, did you really mean to say that neither cracker or ni**ger are offensive words because a lot of black kids call each other those names?

    Parent
    Neither are you (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:29:00 PM EST
    Black youth hanging around using offensive language and pretending it is not offensive are not the arbiters of what is or is not acceptable.


    Parent
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:44:03 PM EST
    Well, there are some pretty defined standards for what's acceptable or not.  Pretty sure those words in that context fall under the not so acceptable standard.  

    Parent
    I don't think so. (none / 0) (#124)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:48:13 PM EST
    There are cultural contexts to the meaning of words. And it also matters who is using them to address whom.

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#131)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:53:08 PM EST
    You're right of course.  You are stating the obvious.  However, it seems fairly obvious as well that when someone refers to someone as a creepy ass cracker and then calls him a nigger or some derivation of that, that he is not using it in a benign manner.  As vicndabx and you just said, context is important and there you have it.

    Also - In day to day conversations, I don't recall cracker being used benignly except on the occasions where cheese was present (or a joke was being made).

    Parent

    Not obvious. (5.00 / 3) (#138)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:00:29 PM EST
    However, it seems fairly obvious as well that when someone refers to someone as a creepy ass cracker and then calls him a nigger or some derivation of that, that he is not using it in a benign manner.

    These are kids using their slang, I don't find it hostile. If anything, if you listen in context, it seems to be said in anxiety. Don't you ever hang around black kids, or any kids, and listen to them?

    Shoot, if I were in that situation, I might have called him a creepy ass cracker myself. And I'm a middle-aged cracker.

    Parent

    Lol (5.00 / 3) (#145)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:06:08 PM EST
    You are stretching a lot here Dr Molly.  I was the "white kid" for years and am only 32 as of now.  I am not ignorant to slang.  I find it very difficult to place "creepy ass cracker" in a positive light and I'm surprised you don't see that.  Really what could he have said for you to think it was hostile?

    Parent
    I guess I don't hear it as positive OR negative. (none / 0) (#150)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:10:38 PM EST
    I completely understand why TM would refer to someone following him around and talking to the police as a 'creepy ass cracker'. Ear of the beholder, I guess.

    I suppose if he had sad 'I'm gonna go after that creepy ass cracker', that might be different. Instead, he seems worried about being followed around -- which IS creepy. Like I said, in the same situation, I might have said something extremely similar.

    Parent

    and if GZ was black, Molly, (none / 0) (#157)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:17:54 PM EST
    what would you call him that would also profile him racially?

    Parent
    This isn't about me. (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:26:12 PM EST
    For all we know, if GZ were black, TM might have called him a creepy ass ni@@er.  Like I said... cultural contexts, age, class, colloquialisms - they matter. And they differ among groups.

    In any case, I'm down with GZ's actions being creepy-ass. No question there, in my mind.

    P.S. I believe you are using 'racial profiling' incorrectly, or at least superficially, but I digress..

    Parent

    Ok (none / 0) (#162)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:20:24 PM EST
    Fair enough.  I understand what you're saying now.  Yes, I might talk smack about someone I thought was following me around too - However, I wouldn't later say it was all in good humor, because it wasn't.  I didn't like that person at the time and that's why I was talking the way I was about them.  And to me, that's what I got out of what TM said - He wasn't happy at all about being followed and he made it known.

    Parent
    Yes, I agree. (none / 0) (#172)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:27:07 PM EST
    If he had said (none / 0) (#166)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:24:00 PM EST
    We have Jeantel's fresh three-and-a-half-week-after-the-shooting testimony to go by.  There are serious doubts about her account.

    Parent
    Oh (none / 0) (#191)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:44:16 PM EST
    Are we voting on posts now?  Lol, I'm new-ish here (long time listener, first time caller) but I don't see too many votes on posts.  Someone gave me a 5 and someone else gave me a 1.  Congrats, I noticed.  But please, instead of giving me a 1, enlighten me to what was wrong with the content.  There are no replies to that post that do so...

    Parent
    yeah (none / 0) (#198)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:05:16 PM EST
    and my kids never meant anything bad when they said "that's so gay", but it still hurt my gay friends feelings.  
    I don't know for sure, but I am guessing that if I went around calling people Ni**er, it wouldn't be taken very well and would be considered hostile.  If someone called me a Cracker I'd probably laugh but that doesn't mean it would be okay with me.

    Parent
    That is exactly what I said. (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by vicndabx on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:44:27 PM EST
    You have no right to define what someone else chooses to call his/her acquaintances.  

    Your post is an example of what I referred to above, an inability to see other perspectives as "right".  Only your own view.  Thanks for proving my point.

    Look around at today's youth.  They've figured out context is more important than anything.  Context is what gives words meaning.  Words by themselves are harmless.

    Parent

    nope (none / 0) (#200)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:09:21 PM EST
    sorry, kids don't have the wisdom to decide when context matters for the larger society.  

    Get back to me in 30 years.

    Parent

    Unacceptable in my opinion (none / 0) (#106)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:29:51 PM EST
    I will say lack of a black juror or two will nor help the prosecution, that's for sure.


    Parent
    Isn't the make up of this jury (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:42:25 PM EST
    Proof positive FL voter reg. laws  and "as applied" should be subject to Department of Justice approval?

    Parent
    "Should not" + [snark] (none / 0) (#119)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:44:14 PM EST
    Voter Reg (none / 0) (#122)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:45:59 PM EST
    Voter reg laws are about disenfranchising democrats.  Republicans understand that many minorities are democrats and therefore that's an easy way to influence the vote.  I don't think the same logic can be applied to this trial or jury selection.

    Parent
    Dunno - that's for you lawyers to tell us! (none / 0) (#132)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:54:15 PM EST
    Don't start playing the race/class card (5.00 / 6) (#41)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:45:38 PM EST
    jondee.  That's weak.  I am perfectly capable of saying exactly what I mean and not at all afraid of your judgement.  So get off your silly soap box. This young woman doesn't need to be patronized by you or anyone else.
    Did she not say on the stand that she didn't care about Crump so she wasn't concerned about telling him the truth?  Did she make several smart ass remarks to West about not wanting to come back the next day if it meant having to come back "to him"? She has a crappy attitude and a not very serious relationship with the truth in a court of law where a man is standing trial for murder.  I take that seriously.  I don't give a damn what color she is, what culture she comes from or the fact that she didn't want to be identified.  You don't get to tell the truth selectively in a court of law.  Maybe she is telling the whole truth now.  How do we know?  The problem is, we do not.

    "Dee Dee" Jeantel is a horrible witness (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by Payaso on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:54:44 PM EST
    She is not credible or likeable.  I am surprised that the prosecution even put her on the stand, but I guess they had no choice.  Without her they have nothing.

    West is doing a masterful cross exam on a difficult witness.  The first thing you have to do is patiently nail them down on all the details.  Then you can start impeaching them when they have no wiggle room left.  He is still on step one.

    Tomorrow will be awesome to watch.

    The prosecution probably (none / 0) (#129)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:51:49 PM EST
    Called her as a witness b/c if they did not the jurors speculate as to why they didn't hear from her.

    Parent
    totally impeached (5.00 / 4) (#77)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:57:59 PM EST
    I'm shocked that some people think she is helping the prosecution, let alone winning the case for them.

    She said Sybrina Fulton tracked her down and texted her about meeting. She said she called or texted her mother, telling her mother to tell Sybrina that she (Rachel) couldn't talk to her. She was irritated to find out that her mother had given Sybrina permission to talk to her. Rachel said she didn't want to talk to Sybrina because she was afraid Sybrina would cry and get emotional, and she doesn't like that.

    She acknowledged that she lied about being 16, not 18, in hopes that she wouldn't have to talk to people. She admitted that she continued to lie about her age,  even under oath, until someone (I think the prosecution) discovered she's 19 now.

    She doesn't seem to understand the seriousness of lying under oath.

    She also acknowledged lying about being in the hospital because she didn't want to go to the wake and see Trayvon's body. Again, that's understandable, but there's no way to know now when she's being truthful or not.

    Her story has changed in substantial ways over time, most recently with her saying that Trayvon said, "Get off me. Get off me"  -- something she never said before.

    Rachel did get upset, such as when she said, "You don't understand." But she always seemed to be talking about her own suffering. So far, she hasn't expressed how horrible it is that Trayvon died or that his parents are terribly sad. At one point, she acknowledged that she didn't want to get involved because she didn't want to be inconvenienced. (Perhaps someone else remembers the exact question.)

    She said she knew a couple of days after TM's death that the authorities knew who the killer was, and so she didn't see any need to talk to anyone in law enforcement or the family. Although she has expressed an interest in criminology, she said she thought police would call her if they wanted to talk to her.

    She said friends of hers went to Trayvon's wake and they talked to her about it, but they didn't mention that GZ wasn't arrested. That seems so odd. I forget when she found out, but it was at least several weeks later. Miami high schools had a lot of agitation over the case, and again, it's odd that she didn't hear anything about it.

    Re: her attitude. I know that anyone who mentions that is accused of having a problem with "uppity" black women. And I could certainly understand if she snapped at West (because I'm ready to do that, too). But if she truly wanted justice for Trayvon, why would she roll her eyes at Bernie de la Ronda and, in general, show contempt for the process? Tracy Martin has laughed and cried, and looked down a lot. He and Sybrina must be hating this.

    Chad Joseph, Brandy Green's son, took it all very seriously, and he's only 15.  


    Exactly. So "only 19" is no excuse. (2.00 / 1) (#105)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:29:28 PM EST
    I couldn't help but see some of her behavior and responses that I observed in court today as sociopathic.  

    Parent
    Nothing has changed (none / 0) (#82)
    by Payaso on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:06:07 PM EST
    I does not matter what the witnesses say.

    The people who think GZ is guilty see all the evidence as proof of his guilt.

    The people who think GZ is innocent see all the evidence as proof of his innocence.

    Parent

    I just spent the time (none / 0) (#84)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:08:56 PM EST
    to detail how she acknowledged lying under oath and how her statements have differed. Perhaps you know people who don't want to hear the evidence or skew it to fit their belief system. But I'm not doing that, and neither are a number of others.

    Parent
    That (none / 0) (#94)
    by John Shaft on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:17:36 PM EST
    is exactly how it works. And, I have empathy for the witness because she did not want to get involved in this disaster. Who would?

    Parent
    This is true (none / 0) (#102)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:28:48 PM EST
    But where I'm standing the prosecution has been doing better than expected...and the defense not as well as expected.

    Besides a minor, but high profile mistake, multiple witnesses have changed their depositions to align themselves more with the persecution.  

    There are obvious reasons for this.  Fear of reprisal is a real thing for those standing up to the persecution.

    Hopefully Jeralyn has a more favorable take on the
    course of the trial so far than I.

    Parent

    Isn't this likely a result of the prosecution.. (none / 0) (#177)
    by Cashmere on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:28:33 PM EST
    presenting their case first?  If I understand correctly (and may be very wrong as IANAL), the defense really can only ask questions at this time (during their "cross"), that pertain to what the prosecution asked in their "direct".  The defense can still call these same witnesses back as they have them listed as potential witnesses as well, and ask of them what they want, where the prosecution can "cross" again, based upon what has been presented thus far at trial.

    I noticed the prosecution has not called Witness John yet.  I wonder if they plan to do so.

    The case is very interesting to follow, from my perspective.

    Parent

    I think it's part of her immaturity, her youth is (none / 0) (#90)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:14:44 PM EST
    definitely showing.  I did find her credible in explaining why she lied about her age,  her explanation of why she didn't want to attend the wake or meet with Sabrina Fulton.  She obviously didn't understand the ramifications of her previous statements and how they could be used to impeach her later on.  I don't know the details of her deposition so I can't say if I think she lied, but she definitely didn't want to participate in any of this, beginning with Sabrina Fulton contacting her and Mr. Crump interviewing her.  She made that very clear today and I think that was part of her attitude, plus I think she felt like Mr. West wasn't really "getting" what she was saying about her previous statements - that she rushed through the interview with Crump, etc.  I think tomorrow is going to be an interesting day.

    Parent
    Angel, I also understand why she (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:45:40 PM EST
    would lie about her age, why she would lie about not going to the funeral, why she would not want to be involved. But she also has plenty of reasons to lie about other aspects of her testimony, and that's the problem. We can't know if she's saying what she thinks Sybrina, Tracy or Bernie de la Ronda would want her to say. Or, maybe she has said what she thinks will get her out of the case as soon as possible. Jurors can still sympathize with her, while not knowing if what she says is true.

    Parent
    That's why I said I can't say if she's lied, (none / 0) (#135)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:57:28 PM EST
    or not.  My impression is that she is telling the truth with regard to her phone conversation with Trayvon, and I've based that impression a lot on her body language as well as her words, how she told her story.  

    Parent
    I'm watching it on youtube (none / 0) (#100)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:24:20 PM EST
    Her direct exam here about an hour in.

    Will find the section with the cross, since I heard so little of that at work today.

    I did not hear her say anything on direct that differs from what I had heard before.

    I didn't follow any of the news stories about the interviews with the Martin family lawyer, Sabrina Fulton, etc, so I guess I will get all of that from West.

    Parent

    I thought the cross was an appropriate (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by scribe on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:50:23 PM EST
    and effective one.  I don't know if it was textbook, but it was good enough.

    This is a witness who has been deeply coached, though she might not be very coachable.  She is very wary and, as TL mentioned, on her church manners.   Look at the internal contradictions in her testimony.

    She was friends (how much is really irrelevant) with TM, was on the phone with him, heard a fight, then the phone goes dead and stays that way.  She finds out later he was dead - killed.  She does not come forward to the cops and instead sits back and waits for them to come to her.  She does not care enough to help the cops sort things out.  When she does get off her duff, it's to talk with Crump.

    There are more, but for someone deeply upset by her friend's death, she didn't do a hell of a lot.

    The attorney doing the cross was doing a good job of (a) backing her into her contradictions and admitting her lies, (b) kicking open doors to get at all those text messages and (c) breaking down her manners to get the real person out in front of the jurors.  And he's doing it in a very polite, mannerly way that no one can take offense at.

    The one thing that struck me, though, was the it seemed at times that the cross was revealing information that was new  to the attorney.  Usually you know the answers before-hand, but he seemed a little flummoxed by some of her answers.

    And toward the end, right before the (none / 0) (#159)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:19:06 PM EST
    actual fight started, she said she went in the bathroom and shut the door and started fixing her hair for school while she had her bluetooth on. So he couldn't have sounded too scared it sounds like. Or is he was, she wasn't overly concerned at that point.

    I don't think her attitude matters so much. I think the jury will just listen to what she says, and not how. Jean whatshername on HLN said the jury didn't take hardly any notes in her testimony, though, so by the time the case comes to them, they may not remember the details she really testified to, just the "I'm not coming back" etc.

    I guess we really don't know until tomorrow when they go over her video. She may do much better then.

    Parent

    I am of the opinion (3.67 / 3) (#7)
    by vicndabx on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:28:33 PM EST
    that in spite of her speech patterns, which in that part of the south are quite normal, that her testimony is rather convincing where it matters.  Thus far I haven't seen anything that lessens her credibility IMO.

    Completely Agree (3.67 / 3) (#9)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:35:37 PM EST
    And in Atlanta where I am that is the way a large segment of the population speaks.  And people will make fun of her nails or the way that she speaks and  point to the fact that she wasn't honest outside of the court room, but her answers make sense and the fact that she said specifically that she heard Trayvon say "get off of me" is very powerful stuff.

    Make fun of her at your own peril.  She may have just won the case for the prosecution.

    Parent

    "...she wasn't honest..." (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by citizenjeff on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:26:34 PM EST
    " ...outside of the court room..."

    One of her lies was under oath. But she did indeed tell that lie, as you say, "outside of the court room." How impressive!

    "...she said specifically that she heard Trayvon say 'get off of me' is very powerful stuff..."

    Why is today the first we've heard that accusation?

    Parent

    Why hear it the first time today? (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:24:09 PM EST
    Because it's pure fiction.

    Parent
    believe her at your own risk (4.25 / 4) (#30)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:57:28 PM EST
    she is an admitted liar and has a lousy attitude.  I have to admire her disregard for Crump.  But she obviously doesn't think the truth matters much.  She tells it at her own whim.  So she says that TM said "get off me".  How do we know that is the truth?

    Parent
    Creepy-ass cracker (3.50 / 2) (#63)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:33:40 PM EST
     Jeantel confirmed that TM racially profiled GZ.

    who called the cops on who? (none / 0) (#67)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:37:37 PM EST
    The real question is... (4.00 / 2) (#88)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:13:02 PM EST
    Who initiated an attack on the other?

    Parent
    That's ONE question. A question without context. (5.00 / 3) (#156)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:17:17 PM EST
    Some might consider a stranger following someone around and calling the police on them a hostile act.

    Parent
    GZ. (none / 0) (#92)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:15:53 PM EST
    Rhetorical... (none / 0) (#98)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:22:16 PM EST
    rhetorical

    Parent
    A stream of non-credible witnesses (3.50 / 2) (#143)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:03:49 PM EST
    changing their depositions to appease the lynch mob.

    You

    I don't care too much about the minor lies Rachel made in her deposition (hospital, age).

    But anyone that believes someone that comes forward weeks later at the behest of a defense counsel wishing to sue for millions and stir up racial sympathy....either agrees with the agenda, stupid, or both.

    Rachel knows Trayvon was the aggressor, and that was why she didn't come forward.  There was only one aggressor in the initial assault.  One person has only offensive wounds. One only defensive wounds.

    And which would the gunshot would be? (5.00 / 2) (#146)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:06:13 PM EST
    Wound. (5.00 / 0) (#149)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:07:04 PM EST
    Should have said "And which would the gunshot wound be?"

    Parent
    A tragic mistake (none / 0) (#164)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:20:49 PM EST
    By a guy being beat up.

    Parent
    Tragic "mistakes" can (none / 0) (#176)
    by IndiDemGirl on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:28:27 PM EST
    still land someone in jail.  

    Parent
    So if Rachel is lying to serve some agenda (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:27:50 PM EST
    why doesn't she say something that clearly indicates GZ started the fight?  

    Parent
    She didn't? (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:43:58 PM EST
    You're watching now, right? I may need to watch again, but I thought she said she heard him bumped, or a bump, and then Trayvon saying "get off get off". That sounds like GZ started the physical part according to her testimony.

    Parent
    She said heard a bump like TM's headphone (none / 0) (#194)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:49:19 PM EST
    dropped against his shoulder. She did not even speculate on what made it happen. Yes, she said he heard Trayvon say 'get off', but she also thinks it was him screaming.  If they establish she thinks it is the same voice screaming that says 'get off', she might have just bolstered GZ's case.

    Seems to me a determined liar could have done better than that.

    Parent

    No, just calling it as I see it. (3.00 / 2) (#53)
    by vicndabx on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:17:11 PM EST


    no, you are race baiting (3.67 / 3) (#65)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:37:12 PM EST
    and doing it in a kind of sneaky manner.  You don't have the nerve to call it as you see it.
    What you are doing is whipping out the race argument because you have nothing else and besides it makes you feel so superior.  Forget that you don't know the first thing about me or my relatives.  If you did, you'd realize you are making an ass of yourself. Gutless and foolish, quite a combination, congratulations.

    Parent
    Ok (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by vicndabx on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:40:26 PM EST
    If you would prefer I call you a racist directly, I most certainly can.  No issue for me.  I was trying to point out how your posts come across somewhat politely.  I'll be blunt then, I think you have an inability to see certain perspectives.  It's been evident in your posts for a while.  Whether it's Prof. Gates, Obama voters, or, this case.  Anything involving race, you always trot out these warnings and throw around the "race baiter" term.  I wonder, did you ever get on Hillary Clinton or any other white woman about her "attitude"?  I've yet to see it in your posts here.  

    Gutless and foolish? Heh, ok sure, I'm so hurt.  Amazing the things people will say over the internet.  I must've hit a nerve.  One thing you did say that was true, I don't know you.  I know what you "say" in your posts.  If you want to be afforded certain courtesies, then engage people appropriately.  Like I don't know you, you don't know me either.

    Parent

    I just told Anne several days ago (2.33 / 3) (#196)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:57:27 PM EST
    she had a bad attitude. I am sure she will back me up on that.  And why just women?  You have a sexism issue or something?  You know what my problem is?  I have been a liberal all my life and a few years ago I got smacked in the face with how blind liberals are to their own prejudices.  Used to be there wasn't a "race card" I wouldn't play or a liberal drum I wouldn't beat.  Then the democratic party began behaving very badly.
    I realized that men on the left are as sexist as men on the right, that there really is racism in lowering expectations for minorities.   When every time someone criticizes or dislikes a black person, you see racism, you are the racist.  Either that or you are incredibly lazy in your thinking. I am seriously embarrassed for you.  I would never judge someone that way.
    You are right I do not know you.  I wouldn't want to.  You are just another walking illustration of why I am so disenchanted with my fellow liberals and need to find something else to call myself even if I do hold most if not all of my politics on the mid to far left.
    Many times I make the alternative argument just hoping people will think about the small minded things they say.  I am not much for group think, sorry about that.  But you have noticed certain things and they don't fall in to your approved list of talking points and trigger words.  So you have me all figured out and I am a racist.  You're an idiot.  I think I will call up my African American Ex and have a good laugh at your expense. Or maybe not because he will just ask me why I bother.

    Parent
    Thanks Teresa in PA (none / 0) (#97)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:21:36 PM EST
    "What you are doing is whipping out the race argument because you have nothing else"

    You're exactly right of course.

    This case has always been race, power and winning at all costs.

    It's never been about the truth, Trayvon Martin, or George Zimmerman.

    There is a reason Fox News hasn't come out in favor of GZ.  The path of least resistance is to give the lynch mob their victim and get back to the status quo.  Just more reason to hate Fox I suppose as the person I align with closest is our current President.  Best one in my lifetime by far.

     

    Parent

    Is Fox generally supportive of Latinos (5.00 / 0) (#101)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:27:27 PM EST
    on trial for murder?

    Parent
    I think her lies about her age (2.33 / 3) (#12)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:45:28 PM EST
    going into the Crump interview hurt her. She lies to suit her, and identifying TM as the screamer before the shot can't be credited.

    As to the "get off, get off" statement, I'm still inclined to believe that for some reason. Maybe the creepy a** cracker unflattering comment added some realism to that portion of her testimony. I dunno.

    Trayvon as screamer... (none / 0) (#87)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:11:53 PM EST
    She testified in deposition that it "could be his voice" but "we know it's not". What do you think she meant by that? Did I hear that wrong? My brother is here and thought that's what it said, too. (When West read from her depo - which I don't understand why the prosecutor insisted West read more sentences - he stopped before the "we know it's not" originally.)

    We'll have the video of it tomorrow.

    Parent

    Prosecutor must have persuaded the court (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:32:20 PM EST
    additional deposit transcript was necessary so the part the defense attorney chose to have read wasn't misleading.  

    Parent
    He did, oculos, but why would he want (none / 0) (#140)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:01:23 PM EST
    to? West finished with "you said it could have been Travyon (she'd said to the DA it was Trayvon), so when West had to read another sentence, it was again "you said it could have been Trayvon, but we know it's not". How does that help the prosecution's case at all?

    Another witness - the lady with long blond hair. I guess he wanted her because she thinks the younger person screamed (just because he's young and probably meek she said, meek which the officer who set up the Neighborhood Watch described GZ as too meek).

    But she also said it was raining buckets of rain - that hurts the case (could wash away blood/DNA) and she said Trayvon was laying face down when GZ shot (he wasn't shot in the back) and she said it was three shots. There weren't three shots. Why did he call this witness at all?

    I just don't see him helping his case at all with these witnesses.

    Parent

    I'm wondering if the witness heard echos from the (none / 0) (#144)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:04:13 PM EST
    gunshot.  

    Parent
    She said (none / 0) (#151)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:12:13 PM EST
    'but YOU know its not'. About 15:00 in at this video. We will see when the prosecutor gives the whole quote tomorrow, but given her speech patterns it seems to me entirely possible that it is something like  "but, you know....it's not...."

    I don't give anyone's opinion on the voice recognition much weight, but as far as the consistency of her testimony I have yet to be convinced she was impeached in that section.

    Parent

    Ah ok, she said YOU (none / 0) (#168)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:24:13 PM EST
    like "it doesn't matter what I say, YOU know it's not" as if he wouldn't believe her anyway?

    I think the only thing she's really inconsistent on is the "get off get off". At least I never heard that before, but my knowledge of this case is about a 2 on a scale of 10 pre-trial.

    Parent

    You'd be wetting your pants if she (2.00 / 4) (#52)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:16:20 PM EST
    had shown up with the demure and respectful demeanor you seem to think she should have.

    I wonder if you have considered that she may well feel pulled in so many directions, feel so vulnerable to attack or to the kinds of sniping about her appearance we've seen here, that this was nothing more than defensive behavior.  That the pure happenstance of being on the phone with Martin in his last moments sucked her into something she is resisting, and is fearful of.

    I'm thinking, no, that probably hasn't been a consideration.

    Anne, demure? (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:31:04 PM EST
    Really?  Please now, why are you being dramatic?  
    Are we really going to try and analyze any witness that behaves badly and make excuses for them?  She's not ten years old.
    This is simple, she was rude, and she has not been truthful.  The most important part is that she has not been truthful.  That's a big deal. As a juror you then have a right and a responsibility to take what they say with a grain of salt.
    No I do not expect any woman to be demure, ever.  I actually admire her disdain for Crump as I can barely stand the guy myself.  But the witness was very antagonistic and for no good reason.  

    Parent
    Jury Instruction (none / 0) (#153)
    by ding7777 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:15:42 PM EST

    I think the demeanor of a witness will be one of the instructions the Judge gives the jury to determine if the witness's testimony is reliable.

    Parent
    DMV (1.00 / 5) (#13)
    by rickroberts on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:50:23 PM EST
    Deedee will soon have a job at the DMV. Guaranteed.

    I only wish YOU could get sent to work at the DMV (5.00 / 3) (#114)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:37:30 PM EST
    for that ugly smear of a comment.

    Parent
    My only problem with DMV workers.... (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:47:44 PM EST
    .... is that there aren't enough of them. The hour long wait I had to endure to renew my license was because they had 3 workers for a packed room.

    Parent
    racist much? (3.00 / 2) (#15)
    by bocajeff on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:56:24 PM EST
    George Zimmeran is not be a racist (1.00 / 1) (#171)
    by IndiDemGirl on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:26:36 PM EST
    but I've noticed some of his supporters sure give a good impersonation of one.

    Parent
    Agreed (1.00 / 1) (#21)
    by rickroberts on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:22:43 PM EST
    We definitely need public servants, but they need to be polite and helpful. Don't tell me you have never encountered "Deedee" at the DMV.

    TMs dad looks like he wants this witness.... (none / 0) (#1)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 02:44:15 PM EST
    ... testimony to be over.

    West is doing a great job. (none / 0) (#2)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 02:57:05 PM EST
    This is painful.

    Parent
    Painful is an understatement. (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:13:28 PM EST
    That's why you go to Florida (none / 0) (#5)
    by vicndabx on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:18:09 PM EST
    to retire

    /snark

    Parent

    watching, but missed first portion (none / 0) (#3)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:10:23 PM EST
    I am watching on hln and missed some of the first part of the cross-exam . . . what is painful that came up and I have missed?

    Parent
    Listening to her justify her prior lies.... (none / 0) (#6)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:27:42 PM EST
    Gone from painful to boring.... (none / 0) (#8)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:30:55 PM EST
    It is torturous, (none / 0) (#25)
    by Tamta on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:29:56 PM EST
    and I can not look away!

    Parent
    Did you see him laughing? (none / 0) (#70)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:41:11 PM EST
    I felt sorry for him. It reminded me once when I was young in church and started laughing and couldn't quit. The harder I tried to quit, the harder I laughed. He hid his face but he looked up a few times like he couldn't help himself.

    Parent
    I saw a tweet with a screen shot... (none / 0) (#72)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:47:12 PM EST
    of that moment saying he was overcome with emotion. I wondered if he was laughing, but guessed that he was just wincing and unable to watch at that portion of the testimony.

    Parent
    I think he got a little tearful while the (none / 0) (#78)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:59:47 PM EST
    DA was questioning her about the last conversation Trayvon had. I did, too. When she starting getting hateful later with West, he was laughing for sure. I think a lot of people were trying not to. She's definitely not going to take $hit off anyone!

    Not that West was being rude at all. She was even defensive with the DA a little. I think she just didn't want to be there. She's definitely not there for her 15 minutes of fame. My mouth just fell open during her testimony. I felt guilty and had to remind myself why she's there and not let her attitude influence what she said.

    Parent

    The "get off, get off" (none / 0) (#83)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:08:26 PM EST
    happened when she was in her teary, leg jittering period of her testimony, which was her most real and sympathetic moment.

    Parent
    Yep, I agree. (none / 0) (#89)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:14:13 PM EST
    I had to testify just in civil court once and my legs were jumpy. The lawyer, who I was testifying for, told me to sit on my hands. I was scared to death. I wouldn't handle something like this well at all.

    Parent
    Tracy Martin was sending a tweet from court (none / 0) (#86)
    by lily on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:10:41 PM EST
    with a smirk on his face

    Tracy Martin @BTraymartin9

    Rachel Jeantal Tray smiling knowing that you got his front back and side, im a big fan of this young lady
    2:40 PM - 26 Jun 2013


    Parent

    He is not being well-advised. (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:23:12 PM EST
    IANAL but is this tampering with a witness (none / 0) (#128)
    by lily on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:51:31 PM EST
    What's funny about her direct.... (none / 0) (#14)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 03:52:03 PM EST
    ... is I thought there was some helpful information for GZ in there, namely that TM thought he was a creepy threat. Enough of a threat that TM might confront and attack GZ.

    Interesting (none / 0) (#32)
    by John Shaft on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:02:18 PM EST
    that you would construe a threat to Trayvon into an attack by him. The kid was trying to evade the "cracker" he was not trying to attack him.

    Parent
    I think it's undisputed that TM... (none / 0) (#35)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:12:15 PM EST
    turned to GZ and said why are you following me?

    Believe me when I say that I think GZ is going to have a hard time justifying what happened to St. Peter. But in Florida with stand your ground, conceal carry permits and GZ's profiling being maybe superceded by TM defending himself a little too well, the outcome is anyone's guess.

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#27)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:49:29 PM EST
    The media in general has provided no analysis of the jurors reaction to her speech patterns, attitude, etc.

    I think they are afraid to touch it.  

    My bottom line now that it is done:  he attitude and way of speaking could easily cut both ways.  The jurors may take a big picture perspective and try extra hard not to let cultural barriers interfere with what their jobs are (which would make her testimony really, really good for the prosecution).

    Or . . .

    They could look at her as an uneducated young woman that they do not understand and therefore cannot trust.

    No idea how it will cut, but this could be a case where the transcripts later are far more powerful than the in court testimony.

    Transcript: (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:17:09 PM EST
    Attorney: can you repeat that?
    Judge: try moving the microphone closer.
    Rachael & Attorney talking over each other, inaudible.
    Judge: One at a time.
    Attorney: So what happened next?
    Rachael: From when?
    Attorney: From where we were talking about?
    Rachel: Huh?
    Attorney: What?
    Judge: Will the court reporter please read back the last question?
    Court Reporter: No. I quit.

    Parent
    I have to think there is a support group (none / 0) (#51)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:12:01 PM EST
    for court reporters that have taken down her testimony at the various depositions and court appearances.

    Parent
    It appears Rachel was an alert witness here. (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:35:46 PM EST
    The question was perhaps vaguebb

    Parent
    There were several rather convoluted (none / 0) (#139)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:00:38 PM EST
    questions from what I saw.

    Even in the trial where I was a juror, I kept wondering why they could not ask clearer questions?  It must be harder than I think it is!

    Parent

    Are those the only two options? (none / 0) (#28)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:53:28 PM EST
    I haven't watched/heard her. But from (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 04:53:37 PM EST
    the discussion here, it seems the transcript will either have lots of "intelligible" or be quite bland compared to her in court testimony.

    Parent
    Try to watch the video if you can... (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Cashmere on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:02:02 PM EST
    very interesting.  I thought she came across better than I was expecting, initially, but in the end, she had many moments of "losing it", in a way that showed how frustrated she was with West.

    Parent
    She also got mouthy, many times (none / 0) (#34)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:11:07 PM EST
    and borderline contemptuous of court procedures at the end. I cannot imagine that even a jury that also must be weary would appreciate that attitude.

    But a jury that is to look only at her testimony in court would not find contradictions, I think.  

    Parent

    Has the judge admonished the witness? (none / 0) (#107)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:30:02 PM EST
    (Or Mr. West)?

    Parent
    No, not once. (none / 0) (#142)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:03:18 PM EST
    But why Mr West?

    Parent
    A couple of times he engaged in (none / 0) (#155)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:15:48 PM EST
    conversation with the witness that was outside the bounds of Q&A. The judge seemed to cut them both some slack on that.

    Parent
    For him to get sideways with her on (5.00 / 3) (#158)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:17:59 PM EST
    this petty stuff like scheduling of a deposition undermined the effect of his cross, IMO.

    Parent
    What do you mean? (none / 0) (#38)
    by me only on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:17:36 PM EST
    By "now that it is done?"

    Does you not believe in the right to cross examine prosecution witnesses?

    Parent

    I was thinking about this case in the car... (none / 0) (#43)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:46:56 PM EST
    just a little bit ago coming back from an appointment.

    I don't like attorney West. O'Mara is much more likable. West comes across as arrogant and callous. If I was GZ, I'd want O'Mara to be the exclusive voice for the defense.

    I agree about the attitudes (none / 0) (#46)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:53:00 PM EST
    but West's voice is a lot easier for me to listen to. Can't place O'Mara's accent - will have to see where he is from. I think trading off as they have been is probably the right approach in a long trial. The jury can get tired of either one of them for different reasons.

    Parent
    I think it is interesting, and must be (none / 0) (#48)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 05:59:20 PM EST
    really frustrating for Zimmerman and his team,  that the screaming does sound high pitched, and like a younger person, to so many witnesses. Then when they heard it was a teenager that was killed I agree with the defense that they assumed it was him that was screaming, without any real evidence of that since they could not see well enough to tell.

    Personally, after hearing GZ's speaking voice, I can believe it was him screaming. All that sympathy the ex-teacher witness felt for someone in a dire situation could well have been better felt for GZ, up until the last seconds anyway.

    If it been a fight between two grown men, the witnesses would not have been able to jump to conclusions after the fact.

    Anyone think the prior 911 calls made by GZ (none / 0) (#55)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:23:02 PM EST
    hurt him? If the prosecution can follow up with none of these calls leading to anything, I could see it being a back door way to inject a "GZ is a racist claim". But if any of those calls led to an arrest, I'd question why the prosecution fought so hard to get that evidence in.

    911 (1.00 / 4) (#178)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:30:14 PM EST
    The next time I see a black person commit a crime, I'll call 911 and tell them to search for possible white, Latino, Asian, Arabic, and Eskimo suspects -- wouldn't want to be racist, dontcha know.

    Parent
    What crime did TM commit? (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:40:02 PM EST
    Oh yeah, he was black.

    "wouldn't want to be a racist..." too late.

    Parent

    That would be cute and clever. (5.00 / 3) (#192)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:45:13 PM EST
    Except, oh wait...., NO black person was seen committing a crime in this situation.

    Parent
    They wanted to establish his growing frustration (none / 0) (#58)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:26:35 PM EST
    and the possible motivation to the 'these ** always get away' comment to the operator the night of the incident. May have been motivation to pursue TM

    Parent
    Unless I'm mistaken, all 5 were reports (none / 0) (#61)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:32:56 PM EST
    of suspicious black males. Is that right?

    Parent
    So... (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:09:21 PM EST
    So what if he was suspicious of black males... I don't know the stats of the calls (if they were all about one race or whatnot) but how exactly does that matter?  I mean, because so many people want to say he's a racist, let's just say he was a racist.  Let's say every black person he saw and he didn't know he was suspicious of.  What does that change?

    Of the 50 calls he placed in 2920 days, did he ever confront someone?  Did he ever escalate the situation?  Why can't that be shown as evidence for the defense that he was accustomed to the procedure and was just doing the same thing he's been instructed to do?  So what if he voiced frustration at burglars "always getting away."  I think most people probably would be frustrated with something like that and all that shows is that maybe he did try to keep track of where TM was more closely.  Again, though, where's the problem with that... or more specifically, what law does that break?

    Parent

    It gives a little extra meaning to (none / 0) (#91)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:15:16 PM EST
    "these f'in punks".

    Parent
    Go on... (none / 0) (#96)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:17:59 PM EST
    elaborate

    Parent
    It does not break a law in itself (none / 0) (#109)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:31:37 PM EST
    The prosecution will argue it goes to his state of mind, which goes to the hostility they have to prove for a murder 2 charge. And the defense will say exactly what you said - he was a model citizen doing his job. The prosecutors will wonder out loud in some fashion - with a witness, or in closing -  what made him follow TM this time, when he never did that all those other times? They will argue it was the accumulated frustration and hostility at the burglars never getting caught.  

    Parent
    Ok (none / 0) (#116)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:41:59 PM EST
    Thanks, well put.

    I feel it's a minor point and don't think it should be made into the crux of the argument that it seems like many here are trying to do.  Especially since it's based on assumptions/conjecture in the first place.  The case is about who attacked who and not about someone calling the police.

    Parent

    But, how can this be ALL this case is about? (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:13:43 PM EST
    The case is about who attacked who and not about someone calling the police.

    Is there no such thing as context? Cause and effect?

    The fight happened in the context of being followed. If not for the following, a fight would not have occurred. How can that not be part of the equation?

    Parent

    eh (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:27:07 PM EST
    Nope doesn't matter.  You are allowed to follow people and we're not even sure if he did.  You aren't allowed to attack people though, so to me that's what matters.  To ruffian's point, I see why the prosecution wants to paint GZ as someone who is prejudiced, though I think you need to make a lot of assumptions to get to that reasoning.

    Parent
    Interesting. (5.00 / 2) (#179)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:30:49 PM EST
    To me, this entire thing devolves back to SYG laws and associated philosophy. It twists everything around so that anything goes for one side.

    Stepping back from all the details, a kid is dead. A kid who wasn't doing anything wrong that we know of.

    No one will ever convince me that that is OK.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:35:50 PM EST
    Well if he attacked GZ because he didn't like him looking at him, then ya he did something wrong.

    Parent
    that we know of (1.00 / 1) (#203)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:29:34 PM EST
    We don't know if TM was or was not doing anything wrong so why even bother going there?  The only thing that matters is what was happening at the time of the shooting.  We can say GZ was the biggest assh&le in the world and if (if , because we don't know yet) TM was sitting on him beating him and GZ was afraid for his life them GZ had a right to defend his life and is guilty of nothing.
    I don't understand why this is not clear.

    Parent
    No, I did not say they are painting him (none / 0) (#181)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:33:12 PM EST
    as someone who is prejudiced.  I am saying they are painting him as someone who wants to catch whoever it is he thinks is burglarizing houses, and keeps getting away.

    Parent
    You're right (none / 0) (#186)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:39:36 PM EST
    Ah you're right, I'm mistaken.  Now it seems like a weaker argument though - really stretching.  Most people want to see burglars caught and most people would be frustrated with them getting away.  They would have to show some degree of frustration that is so out of the ordinary that he would actually murder due to it.  Some choice language while he's calling the authorities doesn't seem to fit the bill.

    Parent
    It is, but following is not illegal (none / 0) (#180)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:33:11 PM EST
    and assault is. A fight would not have occured if GZ had not followed TM and if TM had not confronted or attacked GZ. If GZ had not had a gun, TM would be alive and GZ might not be, but probably would be. Maybe with brain damage, maybe not.

    Parent
    Lots of speculation. (none / 0) (#187)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:40:01 PM EST
    I think you could just as easily turn that around and say that if GZ had not been wandering around like a macho cop wannabe with a gun, then NO ONE would be hurt. Maybe without a gun in the mix, for example, TM would not have felt as threatened and no fight would have occurred at all.

    Parent
    He didn't sound too macho (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:53:57 PM EST
    When he refused to say his address out loud to NEN  because he admitted to be nervous the strange acting suspect was loitering around.

    Parent
    Well, it's not exactly surprising (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:03:26 PM EST
    that a gun-totin' cop wannabes would expose their fundamental fear once in a while.

    Parent
    thx, I think the point is (none / 0) (#141)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:02:40 PM EST
    that the case is also about the whole of why GZ did what he did - that is part of the murder 2 charge.

    Parent
    ok (none / 0) (#169)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:25:23 PM EST
    Understood - thanks

    And... I just found a hair in my fried rice.  That bites

    Parent

    I think that's correct. (none / 0) (#64)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:36:09 PM EST
    5 calls out of how many? (none / 0) (#160)
    by Jack203 on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:19:31 PM EST
    I thought he made like 40+ calls.

    So in 5 of them, he mentions the word black...

    and that's evidence?  Wrong.

    That's probability and statistics.

    WTF

    Parent

    I've thought about that also. Did I hear the (none / 0) (#59)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:29:56 PM EST
    witness say that the two black men that were in the Chevy Impala (or similar vehicle) actually lived in the complex?  And that there was no action taken against them?  And something similar for one of the other calls?  I heard the witness say that one of the people called about had a prior arrest.  Is that correct?  

    Parent
    lived in the complex (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:36:08 PM EST
    Everybody's gotta live somewhere -- even criminals.

    Parent
    It is criminal to sit in a car (none / 0) (#189)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:40:03 PM EST
    near where you live? Cuz that is why GZ called the cops on them.

    Parent
    The testimony led to at least two (none / 0) (#68)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:39:07 PM EST
    contacts made by the police and one arrest for burglary.

    As far as the attorneys, I like O'Mara, too. I think West is interesting to watch because of his facial expressions. When she told him about 3 times she didn't contact the police "don't you watch First 48? They are supposed to call you", he had no clue what she meant. I couldn't help but laugh in a terribly tragic case.

    On the prosecution side, I really like the two younger guys, Guy and the other one whose name I don't know. I think they come across as more intelligent to me. It may be the witnesses they've questioned that make me feel that way, though.

    Parent

    No, I missed that (none / 0) (#79)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:00:10 PM EST
    the first 48?  First, I hate that show because it makes it look like only Black people ever commit crimes in these cities and the occasional Latino.  
    But I would have love to have seen the look on West's face.  I think he has been a model of patience up until now.
    On the other hand, you can't help but like Miss Rachel and her spirit.  If only this were not such a serious matter.

    Parent
    It was a look of pure (none / 0) (#95)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:17:38 PM EST
    befuddleness, if I can make up a word. He had no clue. And I hate that show, too.

    Parent
    on one occasion (none / 0) (#93)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:17:21 PM EST
    In one instance, GZ helped stop a burglary in progress at the home of his friend Frank Taafe.  I don't know if that was by a 911 call, by direct action, or both.

    Perhaps we will hear about it in the defense portion of the trial.

    Parent

    Taryvon Using The N Word (none / 0) (#62)
    by Mr Mark Martinson on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:33:07 PM EST
    I've never heard a black person refer to a white as a "nigger."  

    Did TM think GZ was black?

    Trayvon Using The N Word (none / 0) (#66)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:37:22 PM EST
    I've heard it many times.  There are many shades of meaning to the word;  Sometimes it just means "person".

    Parent
    That's what Paula Deen meant (none / 0) (#76)
    by Payaso on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:55:45 PM EST
    when she used that word.

    Parent
    Except.... clearly not. (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:48:51 PM EST
    haha (none / 0) (#175)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:28:19 PM EST
    well played :)

    just so you know your joke didn't fall on deaf ears... I laughed

    Parent

    Deen meant (none / 0) (#185)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:38:27 PM EST
    No.

    Parent
    Jeantal said "that's slang" after she (none / 0) (#81)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:03:10 PM EST
    said TM had said the n-word. Seemed to me she meant it was not to be taken literally.

    Parent
    GZ white (none / 0) (#125)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:49:41 PM EST
    And GZ isn't white.

    Parent
    Zimmerman is 1/4 black. (none / 0) (#205)
    by redwolf on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:36:52 PM EST
    By a normal American blackness measurement Zimmerman is black.  He appears Hispanic and identifies as Hispanic so /shrug.

    Parent
    Get off (none / 0) (#69)
    by chaking on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 06:41:06 PM EST
    I've never heard the "get off get off" part before.  Is this brand new?  I think, to me, with knowing that she probably wants to see GZ go to jail, that she has already lied about multiple things, and that this is seemingly a new part of the conversation that wasn't made known before... well it seems contrived.

    "Get off" (none / 0) (#104)
    by citizenjeff on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:29:17 PM EST
    Why only now does she tell us?

    Did I miss something? (none / 0) (#108)
    by MikeB on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:30:24 PM EST
    RJ said he made it back to his dad's fiance's house. Somehow he ended up back at the T. We have TWO witnesses who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman.

    What did I miss?

    She clarified, at least at one point (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:55:15 PM EST
    that he meant he was only a few townhouses away. But that still doesn't explain how an out-of-breath GZ could have caught up with him, unless TM wanted to stay outside and talk to RJ, instead of going home.

    Parent
    I don't know how... (none / 0) (#136)
    by MikeB on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 07:58:16 PM EST
    ....anyone can believe anything she says. Watching Nancy Grace, NG she keeps saying that RJ's timeline lines up with Zimmerman's timeline. Why wouldn't it? It took her 3 weeks to talk and she did that to the family lawyer. Had she given her story right away and it lined up, objectively, I think you would have to listen.

    No matter what you think of this case, (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Teresa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:38:19 PM EST
    Nancy Grace is not the place to get info on any case. Even if you think GZ is guilty as hell, I think Nancy thinks no one is entitled to even put on a defense.

    The only media I've found that gives decent commentary on it, without cutting off at a point in a witness' testimony to be biased is the guy on channel 9 watching online, and each night Anderson Cooper has a one hour show at 10 where they're pretty thorough and try to tell both sides. It's not perfect, but it's not HLN.

    Parent

    Get off (none / 0) (#148)
    by Char Char Binks on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 08:07:00 PM EST
    We had a stream of witnesses who saw nothing clearly before the shooting, including one who was virtually blind without her contact lenses.  A lot of nothing still adds up to nothing.

    Geez, where is Yman when you need him? (none / 0) (#199)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:09:01 PM EST


    I think he's limited in the number of comments (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:12:04 PM EST
    per day he is allowed to make on this topic.

    Parent
    Maybe he'll post the 200th comment that.... (5.00 / 2) (#202)
    by magster on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:12:13 PM EST
    will make this comment thread unreadable? Oh, wait....

    Parent
    To get info on this case, (none / 0) (#204)
    by SuzieTampa on Wed Jun 26, 2013 at 09:34:07 PM EST
    in addition to this blog, of course, I highly recommend Rene Stutzman, who has covered court cases for a number of years for the Orlando Sentinel. She's also tweeting @ReneStutzman.

    She tweeted that RJ's "stint on witness stand like none I've ever seen. Jurors interrupted cause they [can't] hear. Ditto court reporter. Very hard to understand"

    So, the problem isn't just white people who are unfamiliar with Black English. Rene and the court reporter have heard lots of people testify, including African Americans.

    this thread is closed, thanks (none / 0) (#206)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 27, 2013 at 04:30:51 AM EST
    to all for contributing.