home

Zimmerman Trial: State's Closing Argument

The state will begin the first of its two closing arguments at 1:40 ET.

The judge has rejected the state's request to include the lesser offense of third degree murder resulting from child abuse and the portion of the self-defense statute on aggressor/provocation. Update: I live-blogged most of the closing without commentary here. (Don't everyone go at once because the server will crash again.)[More...]

My thoughts on the first half: De La Rionda is making the defense case. His theme is assumptions. He starts with it and continues to repeat the theme throughout his argument. He says it's all about the unwarranted assumptions the defendant made.

But it's apparent what he is really asking the jury to do is find Zimmerman guilty based on assumptions the state has made -- both about Zimmerman's assumptions and state of mind.

By overusing the word assumptions, which will resonate in the mind of the jurors, I think they are more likely to use the same word when deliberating about reasonable doubt? If they have to rely on assumptions, the state hasn't met its burden of proof.

When he points out inconsistencies, he follows them with a question about what it could mean. He's trying to create a reasonable doubt about Zimmerman's version, but that's not his burden. His burden is to disprove Zimmerman's version beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't think poking holes here and there accomplishes that.

I'd love to know how the jury is responding to De La Rionda. He's toned down his bombastic style and put some modulation into his voice. At least he's not screaming all the time.

< Zimmerman: Jury Instructions | Thursday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Mr. De la Ronda is doing an excellent job (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:31:08 PM EST
    In my opinion b

    Ha, we agree! (none / 0) (#32)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:32:53 PM EST
    His tone is so much different than when he questioned witnesses, especially his own! He is misstating some things in evidence, though.

    Parent
    Are you being facetious? (5.00 / 0) (#111)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:58:40 PM EST
    I thought he was horrible and from the talking heads, they seem to agree.  He did misstate many things..

    Parent
    I plead the 5th! (none / 0) (#115)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:08:23 PM EST
    Actually, I expected him to come out yelling, etc, and he seemed to tone it down EARLY in his presentation. Then he went downhill.

    Parent
    I thought he was yelling for much of it. (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:28:58 PM EST
    I find him extremely annoying.

    Parent
    voted: BDLR's PERFORMANCE IS POOR! (none / 0) (#100)
    by lily on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:12:18 PM EST
    72% of the 18,000 participants at the live blog at the OS has voted: BDLR's PERFORMANCE IS POOR!

    Parent
    Ridiculous (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:44:01 PM EST
    child? (3.50 / 2) (#114)
    by AghastinFL on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:04:12 PM EST
    right up until the moment the prosecutors choose to charge said "child" as an adult - see: Christian Fernandez, Denver Jarvis, Michael Bent, Jesus Menendez, Alex King, Derek KIng etc, etc etc

    Parent
    Yes ... CHILD (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:45:32 PM EST
    Read the provided link.  For purposes of defining "child abuse" (the relevant statute), a child is anyone under 18.  

    Some people just don't like it.

    Parent

    vis a vis (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by AghastinFL on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:31:58 PM EST
    I maintain the point, a minor is a child to the State of Florida right until the moment that a State's prosecutor decides to charge said child as an adult... my first example Christian Fernandez a 12 year old charged, by the same prosecutor, with a similar offense.

    Parent
    "Maintain" whatever you want (none / 0) (#202)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:28:00 PM EST
    The issue being considered was whether Zimmerman could be charged with child abuse, not whether Martin should be tried as an adult.

    For this purpose (and for many others) Martin is, in fact, a "child".

    Parent

    Bernie, the sometimes hysterical prosecutor... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by citizenjeff on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:17:19 PM EST
    ...accused Zimmerman of lying when he told the police dispatcher he didn't know what street he was on. He says there are only three streets in the community, so of course Zimmerman knows the names of the streets. The problem is, Zimmerman didn't tell the dispatcher he didn't know what street he was on. He told him he didn't know the specific address. If I were a juror, I'd be really alienated by a prosecutor who makes such an obviously dishonest argument.

    What Zimmerman said about not knowing the address comes at about 3:20 of the recording:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9A-gp8mrdw

    And there are 276 homes on that (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:20:24 PM EST
    winding street. Plus they heard the HOA president say she didn't know all the streets (matching to a house number).

    Parent
    De La Rionda's Point (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by rcade on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:54:48 PM EST
    You're missing the point. If Zimmerman knew he was on Twin Trees Lane when he parked his car, he could have looked up from that spot to see the house address 1221 and told the cops 1221 Twin Trees Lane.

    If he knows the name of that street, which is the one residents take every time they turn into the neighborhood, his claim of needing to walk across the T over to Retreat View Circle is much harder to believe.

    Also, if he was walking to Retreat View Circle to get an address, why didn't he stop at that point and call cops with the address? It makes no sense to walk over there to get one and then leave without providing it to anybody.

    Parent

    That was pretty much (none / 0) (#200)
    by lolaatlarge on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:23:34 PM EST
    my thinking during that part, as well. That and the lie about what Manolo was told to tell Shellie (Shelley?) were the big alarm ringers for me. Other than that, his closing fell rather flat. He sounded like a preacher during much of it, with all that rhythmic rising and falling of cadence.

    Parent
    O'Mara! He's there, he objects! (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:21:32 PM EST


    They listened to you (none / 0) (#89)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:39:53 PM EST
    and corrected on break....

    Parent
    He knew he shot him, didn't know (5.00 / 0) (#85)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:26:32 PM EST
    he killed him. When did he say I didn't know I shot him? He told neighbor and police within seconds "I shot him".

    I was a bald faced lie by BDLR (none / 0) (#177)
    by lousy1 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:00:06 PM EST
    Who hoped that he could fool the juries memory with the confusion the GZ displayed when he was informed that TM was dead < he died?>

    One of many factual misrepresentation that he will probably regret after the defense closing.


    Parent

    This NOT a racial (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:30:16 PM EST
    comment.  Sociologists have studied graphics.  The best presentation is of white print on black background....

    Jurors will remember what a white on black graphics says.  In my opinion, the white on blacks are so harsh that they are ugly.  Too many lawyers want their graphics to look nice.  So too many want to use pretty blue backgrounds but the idea is to jolt a jury into remembering the point, not being soothed by them....

    This is a real pointer on graphics that Ph.D. sociologists who serve as jury consultants have studied.....This tip comes via jury consultants from major trials....Scott Petersen, Michael Jackson, etc.....

     

    People have (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:33:13 PM EST
    paid beaucoup bucks for advice like this...and then lawyers turn around and reject it in favor of the pretty graphics...

    Parent
    Haha! (none / 0) (#201)
    by lolaatlarge on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:26:15 PM EST
    Good point. But it's truly a metaphor, don't you think? When you don't have the truth, you wrap it up in aesthetics.

    Parent
    My apologies, then (none / 0) (#91)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:43:55 PM EST
    I just gave away the formula (none / 0) (#94)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:52:49 PM EST
    for the secret sauce.

    Let's see the Defense graphics....Hopefully not more yellow on blues...

    Parent

    the defense has its computer animation (none / 0) (#140)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:26:33 PM EST
    far more sophisticated and based on witness corroboration for GZ's statements

    the state's were like Powerpoint 101, very 1990's.
    The jury doesn't get to take them with them. That's probably why he ran though the ones on the law like lightning.

    Parent

    Surprising to see poster board. (none / 0) (#150)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:54:39 PM EST
    The CNN banners (none / 0) (#97)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:02:05 PM EST
    right now (during Bernie's closing) below the screen make effective use of the white on blacks...

    Parent
    Hear the wind? (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:45:49 PM EST
    And no one is walking. That struck me, too.

    I think (5.00 / 3) (#99)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:11:13 PM EST
    All the lawyers are enjoying mounting the dummy a little too much.

    LOL! (none / 0) (#103)
    by vml68 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:27:16 PM EST
    I just don't get if GZ was smart (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:44:01 PM EST
    enough as they say, with his criminal justice classes, etc., that BDLR kept stressing and took all the time he said GZ took to track TM down, why would he shoot someone knowing the police were just seconds away?

    That just makes no sense. Unless he was fearful of his life. Now they say maybe TM was on top. Why then, would he be screaming and yelling nothing about a gun?

    The stuff prior to that minute or so aside (because I think bad decisions were made then) I just can't come up with a theory that makes sense. And the prosecution didn't either.

    Plus, I don't think Rachel's testimony proved TM was scared. Even she said he spoke first.

    To borrow the prosecutor's closing style.... (1.00 / 0) (#134)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:48:17 PM EST
    to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt: Doesn't it maybe possibly make more sense that the person about to be shot is the one screaming?

    Parent
    For 40 seconds without (5.00 / 0) (#135)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:53:44 PM EST
    trying to get away and/or at least yell gun?

    Parent
    Can't really get away from a bullet? (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:59:05 PM EST
    Don't know about why he didn't yell gun?

    Parent
    He was less that 17 feet from a (none / 0) (#139)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:24:07 PM EST
    patio with a light. That man came out and yelled stop, I'm calling 911. Since we know we can't outrun a bullet wouldn't you beg that man for help? It doesn't make sense to me.

    Now Mr. Crump said on TV last night it doesn't matter who was screaming, but to me it matters a lot.

    We're not ever going to know everything and that's frustrating. It's horrible for TM's parents to wonder if he did see that gun. I pray he didn't. It's awful, if it was self-defense that GZ will never be safe. It's bad all around. Though most people think OJ was guilty of murder, he was just hated or people were disgusted by it, but he was free to live a pretty nice life until that stuff in LV.

    Parent

    What help could the third party witness (none / 0) (#153)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:06:17 PM EST
    provide?

    Parent
    You wouldn't even try if you were (5.00 / 0) (#158)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:11:37 PM EST
    staring down a gun? You wouldn't scream for
    "help he's got a gun", "gun!" anything? Just by reflex, I'd think one would.

    Parent
    The person whose porch light went on. (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:14:25 PM EST
    Is it reasonable  to expect that person to leave a place of safety and come to Martin's assistance?

    Parent
    Not at all but he would have (5.00 / 0) (#162)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:17:41 PM EST
    reported cries or shouts of "gun". He saw GZ screaming. Or at least his face facing him and his lips move, the sound came straight at him and not from the person facing away from him (TM).

    Parent
    wouldn't you? (none / 0) (#170)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:36:23 PM EST
    when John Goode (e or no e?) came out the gun was not yet out of the holster I think? Anyway, assuming it was me and I did not know there was a gun involved, I would go out and I am a woman in my fifties with a bad back.  I am not saying I would try to pull them apart.  But I would go out, tell them I called the cops and then tell them I was filming the whole thing on my phone and warn them to break it up.  Usually if one person will react others will follow.

    Parent
    I wouldn't have gone out not knowing the (3.00 / 2) (#173)
    by Angel on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:46:58 PM EST
    situation, especially if it were dark and raining.  I probably would have yelled at them from my door that I had called the police.  

    Parent
    I doubt I could even make any noise if someone (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:20:14 PM EST
    pulled a gun on me at close range.

    Parent
    Me neither. I'd faint (none / 0) (#165)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:26:01 PM EST
    on the spot.

    Oculus, I have no doubt if John Good had come out in time to intervene before he got scared and there was no shooting, TM would be prosecuted for assault of some kind. That is one reason I think it's self-defense.

    I really wish I was still in my cocoon and didn't know about this case. It's disturbing on several levels.

    Parent

    Why are you so immersed in it? (none / 0) (#167)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:28:03 PM EST
    Several reasons (5.00 / 2) (#193)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:53:35 PM EST
    Two lawyers in my family.  I had an immediate family member falsely accused by a police set up that I have ZERO doubt was set up to try and embarrass my attorney brother (younger brother falsely charge-drugs).

    He got a hung jury. Way in favor of the defense. The judge absolutely went off on the prosecution for trying a case that they had on TAPE showing it was not my brother who sold any drugs. They lied and got caught. Charges dismissed but it had a mandatory minimum that terrified him and me.

    I have a strong interest in the justice system, especially rights of people accused of crimes. I think it's crappy that rich people can get off when a poor person can't in many cases. If someone is charged with a crime, they'd better dang be able to prove it before they charge. It outrages me and usually my outrage is for poor and/or minorities. I don't like poitics dictating the law, though I think politics should be used to change unjust, imo, laws.

    Third, I was and will be again as soon as this is over in the deepest grief of my life. And I've had loss, awful loss. Nothing like what I went through for eight months with my mother. Beautiful and healthy one day, reduced to the skills of maybe a two year old, but couldn't swallow the last few months of her life, which was torture to me. I can't get past this grief stage. My mom's pillows are still laying here with her pillowcases on them since December. I can't take them off and wash them. (made myself cry). I think the trial took my mind off some of my problems and I hope I don't go back to the dark place I was.

    Lastly, I took a media narrative when this first happened and judged this man guilty and I feel bad about that. It's not like me. My heart breaks for the loss the Martins are going through. Based on my mom losing her son, my brother, at a young age, they won't recover for many years. I feel bad for both sides and this case kind of haunts me.

    Parent

    I'm so sorry for your grief (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by SuzieTampa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:01:45 PM EST
    I edited this page on grieving. Maybe it will help you.

    In my cancer support group, several of us are glued to this trial. Some people going through hell seem drawn to big emotional issues.

    Parent

    Teresa (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:30:32 PM EST
    you have been through so much.  When this is over I hope it doesn't all come rushing back at you. I hope you know you do not have to deal with grief by yourself.

    Parent
    you'd (none / 0) (#182)
    by morphic on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:23:14 PM EST
    give up, and not be shot, i;f both knew there was at least one witness, maybe more.

    Parent
    Then if you were Trayvon, you would not have been (none / 0) (#183)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:35:20 PM EST
    screaming from your comment.

    Parent
    My comment was to oculus above. eom (none / 0) (#184)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:36:13 PM EST
    No (none / 0) (#207)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:52:43 PM EST
    I would run like greased lightning.

    Parent
    if anyone, anyone (none / 0) (#152)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:04:58 PM EST
    was sitting on someone else and punching them in the face and/or banging their head into the pavement and the person they were beating pulled a gun they would not just think "oh gee, I can't outrun a bullet, let me sit here like an idiot and scream help". Anyone would try to run.  They would stop hitting the person.  They would yell "Please don't shoot.  I am sorry, I will stop.  See I am getting off you, don't shoot".  It is the person trapped who screams in despair. TM was not trapped. TM had a way out.

    Parent
    On the flip side, (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:10:18 PM EST
    if GZ was so concerned about getting help, why would the screaming abruptly stop at the gunshot? (Again borrowing the prosecutor's style of disproving GZ's innocence beyond a reasonable doubt).

    Parent
    He is screaming for help because he is (5.00 / 0) (#164)
    by vml68 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:22:59 PM EST
    getting beaten up. After he shoots, he is not getting beaten up anymore. Also, just the shock of firing a gun at somebody?

    Parent
    Probably the "stun" thing in testimony (none / 0) (#160)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:15:49 PM EST
    I'd go in shock at the sound of a gunshot. Plus the cries were LOUD and over the 911 call, we can't tell if all talking ended.

    Magster, the FBI interviewed over 30 people of all races. They all told of nothing but a kind man who tutored minority children, always gentle, etc. He surely to God had to be in shock a few days at the thought of what he did. Or he's truly evil. I just don't see an in between.

    Parent

    l (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by swiss473 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:43:15 PM EST
    long time lurker during the trial just wanted to comment everyone on all the great discussion.  very informative.

    personally, i don't think the state proved their charge beyond a reasonable or disproved self defense beyond one.

    It definitely could have happened the way the state says.  It also could have happened a different way.

    Even the state seemed to admit multiple possibilities about who was on top, who was screaming, who was attacking who, etc...

    for me there's definitely enough reasonable doubt.

    one thing about the closing argument that bothered me, though, was how BDLR really manipulated the Hannity interview.

    He showed a clip where GZ says:

    HANNITY: Is there anything you regret? Do you regret getting out of the car to follow Trayvon that night?
    ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
    HANNITY: Do you regret that you had a gun that night?
    ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
    HANNITY: Do you feel you wouldn't be here for this interview if you didn't have that gun?
    ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
    HANNITY: You feel you would not be here?
    ZIMMERMAN: I feel it was all God's plan and for me to second guess it or judge it --

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/07/18/exclusive-george-zimmerman-breaks-silence-hannity?p age=5#ixzz2Yms4L251

    That makes GZ look callous and heartless and having no remorse.

    But...he didn't play the end of the interview where GZ says:

    HANNITY: I asked you if you wanted to -- if you could speak to Trayvon Martin's family. I asked you if you could speak to even the American public, there's so many people that have so many opinions that vary so much. You know, if you wanted to look into that camera and tell the American public something about George Zimmerman and about -- this case with Trayvon Martin that has gotten such media attention, what would you want to tell them?
    ZIMMERMAN: First, I would like to readdress your question when you asked if I would have done anything differently. When you asked that I thought you were referring to if I would not have talked to the police, if I would have maybe have gotten an attorney, if I wouldn't have taken the CVSA and that I stand by, I would not have done anything differently.

    But I do wish that there was something, anything I could have done that wouldn't have put me in the position where I had to take his life. And I do want to tell everyone, my wife, my family, my parents, my grandmother, the Martins, the city of Stanford, and America that I am sorry that this happened.

    I hate to think that because of this incident, because of my actions it's polarized and divided America and I'm truly sorry.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/07/18/exclusive-george-zimmerman-breaks-silence-hannity?p age=9#ixzz2YmsdMiCb

    That leaves a bit of a different impression.  BDLR had to know about that part of the interview.  He deliberately didn't show it and did show the earlier part to create a certain impression.  I guess that's his prerogative and makes sense for the prosecution.

    But it left a bit of a bad taste with me, like he was trying to put on over on the jury, keep something hidden from them.

    Hopefully O'Mara shows that last part tomorrow


    Thank you Swiss (1.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Jack203 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:47:54 PM EST
    I didn't even know about the second part of the interview.  In the Trayvonites insatiable desire to hate and demonize GZ that part of the interview has been forgotten.

    Effing punks a$$holes always get away and the Hannity no regrets interview are pretty much everything they have.

    I hope OMara plays that part to the jury tomorrow and lets it sink in just how manipulative the persecution is.

    Parent

    That was after the commercial break and O'Mara (none / 0) (#206)
    by Angel on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:37:28 PM EST
    told him he better revise the answer to that question.  

    Parent
    Sean Noffke's next call (3.00 / 2) (#181)
    by AghastinFL on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:20:37 PM EST
    ----
    Do you need police, fire, or medical?
    Police, please.
    Ok, sir. What is the issue?
    Well, there's this person...
    Ok... Can you describe this person?
    He's male.
    OK... about how old is this male?
    I exercise my fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.
    Huh? Ok, well is he white, black or hispanic?
    I exercise my fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.
    OK, Can you at least describe to me what he's doing?
    I exercise my fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.
    You know, you're really not being very helpful. What about this person makes you believe you need police assistance?
    I exercise my fifth amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.
    But you want me to send police anyway?
    Yes, please, right away.
    But you're not going to tell me anything about this guy or why you need help?
    No sir, I can't tell you any of that without risking malicious prosecution.
    ----
    h/t misterdeedeebooboo. My only question, humor or self fulfilling prophecy?


    Is there anyplace to watch on line (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:16:21 PM EST
    W/o commentary?

    Several places (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:17:34 PM EST
    The link from mediate.com (none / 0) (#3)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:27:45 PM EST
    is the site that best streams without random "buffering" for me.

    Parent
    Except now I've lost my stream on that site.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:53:01 PM EST
    grrrr!!!

    Parent
    That's not what he said to Mr. Manalo (none / 0) (#4)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:47:56 PM EST
    Can they misstate facts in closings? Is it up to O'Mara in his closing to just correct it with no objection?

    Attorneys may object during closing. (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:49:47 PM EST
    It's best to use discretion though.

    Parent
    Thank you Oculus (none / 0) (#6)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:51:30 PM EST
    Of course. (none / 0) (#8)
    by HammerHead on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:53:14 PM EST
    Bernie says:

    "Because he acted on wrong assumptions, a young man is dead."

    But the fact is, nobody actually knows that his assumptions were wrong.  We only have the word of Rachel Jeantel that his assumption was wrong, and she can't even explain what he was doing for 45 minutes.

    I don't know if O'Mara will make that point in his closing arguments.  I don't know if it would help or not.  But if I was Zimmerman, I think I would want my attorney pointing it out.

    Parent

    C'mon. His assumption was TM was a burgalar (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 12:59:21 PM EST
    OK. (3.00 / 2) (#15)
    by HammerHead on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:08:39 PM EST
    And who says he wasn't?  We'll never know, will we?  Granted, there's no evidence that he was about to commit a crime, but there's no evidence that he wasn't, either.

    You could say that his suspicion of Trayvon was unfounded, but you can't truthfully say it was false, unless you know for a fact that he wasn't.

    And we really have no idea what he was doing or getting ready to do.

    Parent

    eye roll.... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:10:57 PM EST
    Fine. (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by HammerHead on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:20:23 PM EST
    I don't care if you like it or not.  It's not a false suspicion.

    But tell me.  You don't find it at all odd that Trayvon supposedly tells Rachel everything he's doing, up to and including that he's putting his hood up because it's raining, but she can't explain what he's doing for 45 minutes?

    And at any rate, if you actually listen to the NEN call, he says that it looks like Trayvon is on drugs or something.  Which, it turns out, he might very well have been.  So that was a suspicion he had that might indeed have some basis.  You would certainly agree with that, wouldn't you?

    Parent

    Because you can't prove a negative (3.67 / 3) (#84)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:23:36 PM EST
    Someone says you might be a child molester.  Now prove it's false.

    See?

    But if you want to be more precise, then let's just say there's absolutely no evidence that he was about to commit a crime.  We could be 100% accurate in calling these claims what they are - specious, baseless, evidence-free, groundless, gratuitous, imaginary, unwarranted, etc., etc., etc.

    Parent

    No. I don't agree. (none / 0) (#26)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:26:25 PM EST
    OK. (none / 0) (#86)
    by HammerHead on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:29:02 PM EST
    You're forgetting that Zimmerman's "false suspicion" is being blamed for someone's death.

    Let's try a hypothetical here.

    Suppose you had a colleague that you suspected of unethical behavior.  You couldn't prove anything, but you thought that whoever's job it is to investigate these things should investigate.  So you call the office of the inspector general and report it.

    Suppose, then, that the person you suspect catches wind of this and commits suicide.

    Then, suppose that people went around saying "This person died because of magster's false suspicions.".

    Wouldn't you inform people that nobody knows your suspicions were false?  That, for all anyone knows, your suspicions were perfectly legitimate?  I know I'd be shouting it from the rooftops if that happened to me.

    And I would certainly inform people that, true or false, I had a perfectly reasonable reason to be suspicious.  The testimony from Wendy Dorival, if I recall, was that people hanging around at night, not going anywhere in particular, are perfect examples of something suspicious to report to the police.

    Parent

    Probably (none / 0) (#10)
    by Char Char Binks on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:02:40 PM EST
    But GZ never said exactly what he suspected TM of.  And he had the right to suspect him, even if the suspicion was false.

    Parent
    Why? (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    What crime was TM about to commit?

    Parent
    Burglary, (1.00 / 5) (#156)
    by Char Char Binks on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:10:41 PM EST
    maybe.  He certainly committed assault and attempted murder.

    Parent
    Why on earth your repeated (4.56 / 9) (#161)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:16:11 PM EST
    inflammatory and false comments are allowed to stand is beyond me.


    Parent
    It seems... (5.00 / 4) (#176)
    by Thanin on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:57:39 PM EST
    attacking George Zimmerman character isn't as ok as attacking Trayvon Martin's character.  You know, Trayvon Martin, the one who actually died?

    Parent
    Please say good things about TM (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Jack203 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:43:25 PM EST
    to counter the mountain of evidence he was a very troubled teenager.

    I'll start. Trayvon seemed like a good brother.  His brother Javarhis seems like a bright guy with a good future ahead of him.   Trayvon had his whole life ahead of him and it's a tragedy any person as young as him died.  He had plenty of time to turn his life around, and there is a very good chance in his mid-twenties he would have and had been a productive member of society.


    Parent

    Burglary (1.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Jack203 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:52:44 PM EST
    is very unlikely.  So unlikely it's beyond all reasonable doubts and not worthy of being mentioned.

    But the assault is more than accurate, and attempted murder is debatable.

    I've heard plenty of delusional theories from yourself.  

    Parent

    Z suspected M (1.00 / 1) (#203)
    by Char Char Binks on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:28:02 PM EST
    of something, and it was probably burglary, or casing apartments for burglary.  I don't know if the suspicion was warranted, and it doesn't matter -- he is entitled to suspect people, even if the suspicion is unfounded.  The assault by M on Z is a fact, and if he threatened to kill him while reaching for the gun, that's attempted murder.  Does "yourself" think that's delusional?  BTW, thanks for the compliment.

    Parent
    Was there any evidence as to how Martin (none / 0) (#13)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:05:54 PM EST
    acquired the $40 in his pocket?

    IIRC (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Quintus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:12:30 PM EST
    His father gave him $100 for movies and such.

    Parent
    So (1.00 / 1) (#21)
    by lousy1 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:21:13 PM EST
    The father claimed anyway.  Guess the (3rd) suspension and drugs didn't warrant a little wing clipping.

    Parent
    Wasn't arguing it either way. (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Quintus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:42:43 PM EST
    It was just something that I vaguely remember hearing/reading when sifting through this case.

    Parent
    What was on the button on Martin's (none / 0) (#53)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:54:47 PM EST
    hoodie?  Size? Position?

    Parent
    Near his heart, I think. (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:03:10 PM EST
    Something in memory of a lost relative or friend, I believe.

    I wish the bullet had hit the button and maybe moved it an inch. He'd be alive.

    Parent

    Prosecutor got awfully close to ..... (none / 0) (#14)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:06:34 PM EST
    ... saying "why didn't GZ testify". Too close?

    No objection. (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:14:04 PM EST
    The main lawyer, the one the jury (none / 0) (#19)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:19:30 PM EST
    most likely feels goodwill for isn't there. I think he should be, don't you? I know he's worked to death and today we (I) found out there's only one actual lawyer assisting them - the rest are volunteer interns.

    But, don't you think as a juror, glancing at the defense table, they'd feel differently if they saw the "good guy" lawyer? I don't know how to explain it, but I feel it and I'm not a juror and I'd bet they feel it, too.

    Parent

    I represented a state highway patrol officer (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:26:50 PM EST
    and the state. At the beginning of the trial, plaintiffs dismissed the case as to the officer.  After the first part of the trial, a verdict of liability, I told the officer he was no loner needed. He had been at counsel table. The bailiff offered his opinion the officer should still be at counsel table. Same rationale. I followed his advice. We still lost!

    Parent
    I agree (none / 0) (#43)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:46:25 PM EST
    and right over Bernie's shoulder you can Zimmerman's dad in the second row, center.  He is rolling his eyes, laughing.....Does not come off well.

    Parent
    He was a magistrate (none / 0) (#45)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:48:19 PM EST
    Guess he's heard more than his fill of BS in his lifetime....

    Parent
    So he should know how harmful (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:01:57 PM EST
    His reactions are to his son's defense and how disrespectful to the court  

    Parent
    That kind of thing (none / 0) (#49)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:52:54 PM EST
    is usually not received well by jurors....

    True, not Zimmerman himself, but it is distracting because he is in the picture with Bernie so often.  

    Parent

    He probably knows that (none / 0) (#51)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:53:45 PM EST
    You think that it is a deliberate strategy? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:56:14 PM EST
    Jurors resent the daylights out of stuff like that.

    Parent
    Only if they're paying close attention (none / 0) (#63)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:02:13 PM EST
    It is amazing what they see (none / 0) (#77)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:14:51 PM EST
    But is not Zimmerman himself, so who knows...

    Parent
    I wonder how much little things like that.... (none / 0) (#47)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:51:37 PM EST
    .... make a difference.

    Parent
    He just took his wife's hand now (none / 0) (#48)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:52:48 PM EST
    So far, the prosecutor's closing argument (none / 0) (#23)
    by Buckeye on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:23:24 PM EST
    is inline with what I think the prosecution is doing - they have kind of punted on murder 2 and are focused on manslaughter.  "Assumptions" as the focus.  GZ making poor assumptions leads to negligence or recklessness that led to a death.  That is manslaughter if the jury believes GZ was not legally defending himself.  The entire argument so far for a depraved mind is GZ one statement to the police about f'ing punks and a**holes always get away.  That is it.  That one statement being a depraved mind and so far that is the only time they spent on it.  That tells me they are focused on manslaughter.

    Agree. Having watched the entire (none / 0) (#28)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:27:56 PM EST
    trial, I still don't see how they can prove intent. He never got his gun out until the end, at least as far as John Good saw. And he didn't yell GUN or anything else to John Good, who I base most of my opinion on this case on. Totally credible witness I thought.

    Parent
    I have to turn this off (none / 0) (#24)
    by labrat on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:23:28 PM EST
    or I might break my TV.

    I can't bear to watch, (3.00 / 2) (#101)
    by Leopold on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:20:53 PM EST
    and haven't watched a single minute of it. It is too much like a sporting event, which I find disgusting. A human being is dead. And I can't help like feel as if people are rooting at a football game.

    Parent
    It does seem like that at times.... (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:29:58 PM EST
    But, this case is a window into some of the warts of this country (race relations, politics, executive power through a prosecutor's office, media) and following this trial isn't just ghoulish voyeurism, at least not just for me.

    Parent
    GZ needs to sit up straight. (none / 0) (#25)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:25:16 PM EST
    My brother thinks he's sedated and I'm starting to think so, too. He's listening, but it portrays an impression of disinterest that the person speaking might not be telling his story the way he believes it.

    I'd get thrown out of court for speaking up to mistruths, so I'd have to be sedated so I don't mean that disrespectfully.

    He most certainly was instructed to display (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:29:48 PM EST
    to closing arguments.

    BTW:  defendant is of substantial size.

    Parent

    Yes, I think they said he gained over (none / 0) (#31)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:31:25 PM EST
    100 lbs since this happened since he's stuck in a safe house somewhere. Nothing to do but stress eat, I guess.

    Parent
    He should have lost weight, not gained. (none / 0) (#34)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:35:57 PM EST
    Oculus, I've been slim since I was in (none / 0) (#40)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:42:54 PM EST
    my 20s, but I'm a stress eater. I lost a lot of weight at 27. I mean a lot. I still to this day stress eat and then I starve myself when it's over for fear of gaining that weight back. I'm proud of myself for keeping it off because most people don't. But stress = eat to me.

    Parent
    Bernie lied on # months of "MMA" (none / 0) (#33)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:35:10 PM EST
    training, too. I'd have left that part out. It weakens his argument I think.

    the MMA angle was always ridiculous (none / 0) (#212)
    by ExcitableBoy on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 09:11:41 PM EST
    When the state never called his trainer, and relied on a throw-away line to Zimmerman's PA to bring it in, it was obvious there was nothing to it. You knew the defense team would call the trainer themselves.

    Amazingly, the "MMA-trained fighter" story is still being pushed in some of the articles I've read.

    Parent

    Prosecutor is presenting scenarios (none / 0) (#35)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:39:37 PM EST
    Should be the other way around.

    (I should just open up a comment and type my thoughts and hit one big post. Sorry to be chattering too much.)

    Carry on. I appreciate your take. (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:40:33 PM EST
    :) ty magster. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:47:33 PM EST
    I WANTED him to be guilty, I swear I did. Last year before my mom's accident I thought he was. After the trial, I honestly don't. Just foolish. I blame FL CC laws, too. My ex-husband has one. I hate them, but they're legal. Why we need that, I don't know.

    Sorry for the gun stuff, J. I think a lot of people have issues with that part of this, or any, shooting case.

    Parent

    I guess I don't understand this comment... (none / 0) (#179)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:06:40 PM EST
    Why would anyone "want" someone to be guilty?  Why not want justice, always?  Simply curious.

    Parent
    Because I bought into the narrative (5.00 / 0) (#196)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:02:02 PM EST
    the media and others wanted me to. I didn't see any coverage after about the 3rd week in March. I did hear he got arrested but knew nothing of the details until a month ago.

    I judged him prematurely, I admit that, and don't particularly like myself for it. Justice, true justice, matters a lot to me and I was wrong to do that.

    Parent

    Seems to me (none / 0) (#36)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:40:32 PM EST
    If the prosecutor is presenting different scenarios, that means reasonable doubt - not guilty.

    Parent
    He is emphasizing evidence which undermines (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:43:51 PM EST
    portions of Defendant's numerous statements.

    Parent
    Looking for an address (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:53:40 PM EST
    Bernie is hitting that hard...

    Parent
    As he should. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:56:35 PM EST
    Prosecutor should not be giving his opinion of the evidence. But no objection.

    Parent
    Lots of "Is" (none / 0) (#60)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:59:25 PM EST
    But better for West as the only lawyer in courtroom for Defense to NOT object.  O'Mara could pull it off but West is so needlessly combative....  

    Parent
    Why is the victim's OWN blood (none / 0) (#46)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:48:24 PM EST
    from holding his chest not there? That bugs me.

    All bleeding internal? (none / 0) (#52)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:53:53 PM EST
    Dunno.

    Parent
    The bullet hole in the autopsy photo .... (none / 0) (#54)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:54:57 PM EST
    .... looks like a cigarette burn.


    Parent
    Yes, but testimony was (none / 0) (#58)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:57:39 PM EST
    they pulled the shirts over him probably taking some blood, and then washed him. ME office did a bad job.

    The lack of blood evidence from both sides bothers me.

    Parent

    Bill Shaeffer - very fair likes Judge (none / 0) (#55)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 01:56:03 PM EST
    I used to think he was pro-prosecution actually. Says this is going bad. Prosecutor job is to answer questions not bring up questions like this. He's not presenting their theory.

    He said bad by any means you want to measure. Very poor.

    -one juror hasn't made contact with BDLR one single time per their reporter there. He says that's bad, too.

    That is one thing we don't (none / 0) (#61)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:00:59 PM EST
    have is the ability to judge juror reaction....

    Parent
    It is surprising the prosecutor has his back to (none / 0) (#66)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:05:36 PM EST
    the jury while he is speaking to them.

    Parent
    Yes, and I guarantee that the (none / 0) (#67)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:06:43 PM EST
    reporters on TV tonight who are there and used as talking heads will describe juror reaction totally opposite of each other. The wftv reporter doesn't do that. She just reports (I watched her during Casey Anthony because my mother wanted me to watch that trial. She's very good).

    Parent
    Kathi Belich? (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:08:07 PM EST
    She just tweeted a few minutes ago:

    The state appears to be trying to create doubt about #Zimmermanon9 's story rather than proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt.


    Parent
    Yes, that's her. She's good. (none / 0) (#73)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:11:33 PM EST
    Covered many many trials.

    Parent
    If I owned a tv station on east coast... (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:10:39 PM EST
    I'd have the station letters be WTF. And now your 11 o'clock WTF news!

    Parent
    Can I... (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by bmaz on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:55:49 PM EST
    ...come work with you at WTF?  I am sooo ready!

    Parent
    LOL magster. (none / 0) (#75)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:12:34 PM EST
    I bet that's similar to certain letters not being produced for license plates. Thanks for the laugh!

    Parent
    I wonder if the no eye contact juror is on the (none / 0) (#126)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:26:45 PM EST
    jury, or an alternate?

    Parent
    He still seems pro-prosecution to me. (none / 0) (#208)
    by lolaatlarge on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:57:54 PM EST
    He was very angry that they blew it. Wears his heart on his sleeve.

    Parent
    Viewer poll on WFTV (none / 0) (#70)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:09:15 PM EST
    18,000 - 72% of people say closing going "very bad". Wow, I don't think it's all that bad.

    What % of those polled (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:11:26 PM EST
    watched the entire trial?

    Parent
    I'd bet all of them. (none / 0) (#78)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:14:56 PM EST
    The cover it live blog has that many every day. Their webstream is up to 300,000 from all over the world.

    I don't read the comments often, but when I do, they are speaking of court evidence.

    Parent

    The problem is not the lawyering ability (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Buckeye on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:12:21 PM EST
    of the prosecutors, they are just pushing a case with very little evidence that is not exculpatory.

    Parent
    How did he know no neighbors (none / 0) (#79)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:17:14 PM EST
    had security cams out back? Some of mine do but I only know because they told me.

    Jeez, BDLR that's two days later (none / 0) (#90)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:40:44 PM EST
    after police went over it with him several times. Of course the knew the street then.

    Ok, there he said it (none / 0) (#93)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:48:56 PM EST
    I wasn't sure I shot him

    I think when Zimmerman said he wasn't sure he.. (none / 0) (#197)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:04:25 PM EST
    ... shot him, he meant right after the shot, which is why he then straddled Martin and put his hands away from his body.  Granted, this is also a point of controversy as Martin's hands were found under his body, but De Maio (spelling??) testified that Martin could have remained conscious for I believe 15s and could have moved during this time.  

    Just another point that is plausible under Zimmerman's account and makes the prosecution's "beyond a reasonable doubt" attempt at conviction difficult.

    As for Zimmerman not giving CPR to Martin as stated today by BDLR, well, I imagine he was in shock, he may not be trained in CPR, and he may have been thinking more about his own safety.


    Parent

    So their whole case is boiling down (none / 0) (#96)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 02:58:46 PM EST
    to inconsistent statements over 5(?) interviews. After the police testified they were minor and had he been consistent all the way through, they'd expect him to be lying.

    did you think he was telling the truth? Yes (struck, but they heard it)

    4 medical people testified (none / 0) (#98)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:03:05 PM EST
    blood won't come out most likely while you're on your back. Goes to nasal cavities, sinuses, and throat.

    (This God's plan thing bothers me the worst of all the stuff he said)

    That was such a let down.. (none / 0) (#102)
    by ZucchiTadre on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:24:48 PM EST
    Was hoping for something better but it just left me scratching my head.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#104)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:27:50 PM EST
    But the jury gets to think of BDLR's last words - about how the last pictures the Martin family has of Trayvon are his autopsy photos.

    Pretty powerful line for them to think about all night long.

    Parent

    o'mara objected (none / 0) (#143)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:28:24 PM EST
    to his playing that sympathy card at the end. The judge didn't grant it but the jurors I'm sure heard his objection and recognized it for what it was. They will get an instruction on sympathy not being allowed to affect their verdict.

    Parent
    Oh sure (none / 0) (#149)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:44:17 PM EST
    jb....I guess because I am an actor (none / 0) (#180)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:08:30 PM EST
    and have spent most of my life in the theater, theatrics do not get to me.  Bernie's not much of a method actor. He got to me more with the inconsistencies. But already Teresa has done a pretty good job in comments here clearing those up.

    Thank you Teresa. (ps...nice name)

    Parent

    Nice Jake Tapper (none / 0) (#106)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:30:58 PM EST
    A prosecutor invested deeply with the family, a lawyer who argues for the prosecution on HLN at night and a gentleman lawyer who made a fool out of himself with lack of knowledge on Piers Morgan last night and thinks GZ is guilty as hell.

    Nice objective views here!

    I hope O'Mara addresses the (none / 0) (#107)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:35:04 PM EST
    actual evidence. I want to see if he tailors it as badly as BDLR does.

    I think Guy does the final closing and he'll be better. I think he did the JOA argument (the first one?) and did better than this today.

    Guy has this Eliott Ness/FBI (none / 0) (#142)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:27:21 PM EST
    intensity that befits a prosecutor....

    Parent
    Kathy Belich saw a juror (none / 0) (#108)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:38:24 PM EST
    looking through her notes as if to check to see if the evidence was stated as given.

    I thought there were some interesting.... (none / 0) (#109)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:41:08 PM EST
    points in the prosecution's closing that made me go "huh? yeah why did GZ do that?" but why didn't the prosecutor pursue those angles with the investigating cops during testimony?

    For proof beyond a reasonable doubt, I just don't think it's there.

    Agree, magster (none / 0) (#110)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 03:48:10 PM EST
    I just read that when a prosecutor ends with a slide that says "What If?", you've done the defense's job for them.

    Parent
    Let's see how the prosecution handles (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:58:28 PM EST
    Their final hour of argument.

    Parent
    Even though I believe the prosecution (none / 0) (#113)
    by vml68 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:03:36 PM EST
    did a terrible job proving their case, I am not sure the jury will not convict.

    Parent
    Agree. (none / 0) (#117)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:11:48 PM EST
    I won't be shocked at all if it's manslaughter. I think it would get overturned on appeal because the prosecution used TM's fighting ability by stating his weight and stuff like that.

    The defense wasn't allowed to present evidence that he did have fighting skills and lawyers I've read say that's reversible error and there's plenty of case law to bring them in.

    Parent

    I believe (none / 0) (#118)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:12:38 PM EST
    There's at least one CCW holder on the jury.  Might come into play somehow....

    Parent
    That could go both ways.... (none / 0) (#119)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:14:32 PM EST
    He/she might be indignant that a CCW holder acted like he did?

    Parent
    That comment is exactly what I thought, magster. (none / 0) (#120)
    by Angel on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:15:28 PM EST
    It would be "she" (none / 0) (#123)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:20:49 PM EST
    Since it's an all-female jury.

    And you could be right, but then again, they may also be thinking, "Why did he wait 40 seconds?"

    Parent

    My feeling on what comes into play (my bias) (none / 0) (#124)
    by vml68 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:21:45 PM EST
    is that as women, it is going to be hard to ignore the fact that these parents have lost a child who for all intents and purposes was doing nothing wrong, just walking home.
    I know they are not supposed to make a decision based on emotions but how do you avoid it?

    Parent
    It would be very hard (none / 0) (#128)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:27:21 PM EST
    I have never sat on a jury, so I can't tell you from personal experience.

    But then again, Mrs. Zimmerman has a son who was being beaten for no other reason that he was trying to be a good neighbor and felt he had to defend his life.  Shellie Zimmerman has a husband who was thought he was on his way to Target who ended up where we are today.

    But, I think most jurors on most jurors take their oath seriously enough that they can look past their own emotions.  It's also easier when there are other people who can talk you around your emotions, I think.

    Parent

    Wear story. Murder trial. Jury gets a break (none / 0) (#166)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:26:59 PM EST
    and is leaving the courtroom. Extremely cute maybe 4 yr. old son of defendant squeezes between the jurors to get into the courtroom. Grandmother who runs a small grocery store ruffles little boy's hair and smiles at him. She votes "guilty" on the first ballot.

    Parent
    I don't think women are (none / 0) (#130)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:35:19 PM EST
    less competent than men to make a judgement based on facts.  I don't think men are any less effected by the death of a teenager.  You certainly could not prove that by the reaction of some of the men here.
    If someone agrees that GZ was getting beaten up and was in fear for his life them TM was not doing anything wrong, you are correct.....until he WAS doing something wrong.

    Parent
    I know what you are saying is true.... (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by vml68 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:41:30 PM EST
    I don't think women are less competent than men to make a judgement based on facts.  I don't think men are any less effected by the death of a teenager

    that is why I put "my bias" in there... :-)

    Parent

    Impulse control (none / 0) (#209)
    by lolaatlarge on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 09:04:45 PM EST
    YMMV

    Parent
    The woman who has been (none / 0) (#125)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:24:20 PM EST
    taking notes so consistently and speaking up to the judge when the jury can not hear etc... her husband and son carry firearms I believe.  I do not know if she does.  But she has been described as coming from a "gun family".

    Parent
    Just wondering (5.00 / 0) (#178)
    by friendofinnocence on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:03:15 PM EST
    Would anyone here who found himself or herself in the same situation as Zimmerman just let Trayvon Martin beat you until when and if he decided to stop, or would you try to defend yourself as best as possible?

    I would most certainly defend myself, with whatever force necessary and/or available to me.

    I'm absolutely certain in this city if any police officer found himself/herself in the same situation, they would not hesitate to use lethal force.  They prove that on a pretty regular basis.

    Parent

    The ultimate question. (none / 0) (#112)
    by HammerHead on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:00:19 PM EST
    "His burden is to disprove Zimmerman's version beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't think poking holes here and there accomplishes that."

    That's really all the state has done all along, isn't it?  Yesterday, they seemed to be agreeing that Trayvon was probably on top, and had probably hit him at some point.  The only question was whether or not he might have stopped hitting him before Zimmerman shot him.

    So my question is, if George is found guilty of something, what are the odds of an appeals court overturning it?  

    Yesterday, it seemed as though the prosecution was admitting that Zimmerman's story of self-defense was at least as plausible as anything else.  I wasn't able to watch all of the closing statements today, but I didn't see anything that really challenged the plausibility of his story.

    So not only has the prosecution not proven anything beyond a reasonable doubt, as far as I can tell, they never really even tried to.  So could an appeals court find that Nelson should have granted the motion for judgment of acquittal?  Any legal types have any idea how likely that is?

    I have to give the bald dude credit (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:27:04 PM EST
    he even had me swayed a bit today and even though all the legal types were saying he was not "doing it right".  The idea introduced yesterday during cross that TM could have been getting up when GZ shot. I have to admit, at least they put some questions in my mind.  Would it be enough for me to find him guilty if I were on a jury, no because of reasonable doubt.  But sitting here at home, sure it bothers me.
    I am guessing that MOM will reel me right back in tomorrow.  I expect him to be very effective.  

    Parent
    Getting up (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Char Char Binks on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:45:27 PM EST
    Good point, but Z apparantly drew and fired in a split second.  The fact that it was a contact shot (with the hoodie), only a couple of inches from his body, and hit square in the chest, with no turning away, shows that he probably wasn't trying to escape.

    Parent
    Given the reenactment video, (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:51:13 PM EST
    How could defendant have gotten the gun out quickly and fired a clean shot?

    Parent
    was only a clean shot if (none / 0) (#186)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:42:10 PM EST
    you assume he meant to shoot TM in the heart.  My understanding was that he pulled the gun and shot and was not even sure if he hit TM. Hitting him in the heart was kind of a freak event.

    Parent
    No one ever seems to mention (none / 0) (#211)
    by lolaatlarge on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 09:11:29 PM EST
    that the bullet itself could have and would have propelled Martin's body back. He might not have even sat up as much as been pushed up by the bullet.

    Parent
    I think it's a reasonable scenario (5.00 / 0) (#185)
    by Jack203 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:38:07 PM EST
    that Trayvon was finished with the assault because GZ had clearly had enough...which gave GZ the opportunity to pull out his gun and shoot TM...

    I've always had the opinion that scenario was more likely than any scenario where TM wanted to kill GM.

    I also find it more likely TM saw the gun, realized the seriousness of the situation and reached for it, for no other reason than to make sure GZ didn't shoot him, not that TM wanted to use it on GZ.

    That being said, in both scenarios GZ's options can still be clearly defined as self defense.  GZ could not have known TM was only a fighter and not a dangerous criminal.

    Parent

    yes (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:15:50 PM EST
    in a small moment, it is possible GZ could not know what TM was thinking.  However it is entirely possible that TM did talk shit about "you're going to die" even if he either did not entirely mean it.  The kid wasn't exactly a choir boy.

    Parent
    The 2-4 inches away argument.... (none / 0) (#174)
    by Cashmere on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:47:51 PM EST
    The shirt being away from the body, makes it highly unlikely Martin was pulling away.

    Parent
    But he could be leaning back in (1.00 / 1) (#213)
    by lousy1 on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 09:21:40 PM EST
    Of course he might have decided that he had weakened GZ sufficiently that he could stand and simply kick the hell out of GZ.

    Generally if you are disengaging from an opponent that has possibly been beaten into submission you would challege  for a verbal 'Tap out' or 'I give' response.


    Parent

    So, in closing, what tone will MOM use....? (none / 0) (#116)
    by magster on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:08:40 PM EST
    It will be a delicate dance to convey that this was a tragedy while at the same time arguing self defense. If the prosecutor did anything right today, it was that TM was coming home armed with Skittles, tea and $40.15. If MOM demonizes TM too hard, he might help prove a "f'in punk" mentality and offend jurors. That's about the only danger I see for GZ tomorrow.

    He'll do well if he does it like he (none / 0) (#121)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:17:05 PM EST
    did the first JOA. He was very very good. Showed true belief in his client without sounding like bullsh*t. Destroyed much of the evidence. I thought it was really good.

    Very soft voice, conversational, I'd guess. He's been that way all along.

    Parent

    O'Mara has the demeanor (none / 0) (#144)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:28:53 PM EST
    of a senior level doctor making rounds at the hospital...Thoughtful, serious, intelligent, approachable.

    Parent
    What is "JOA?" (none / 0) (#145)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:30:17 PM EST
    Judgment of Acquittal (none / 0) (#148)
    by bmaz on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:39:15 PM EST
    What a lot of us also call a DV, for directed verdict.

    Parent
    the same tone he's used throughout (none / 0) (#146)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 05:30:24 PM EST
    the case. Calm and sincere.

    Parent
    oh lord I agree with Jose Baez (none / 0) (#122)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:18:32 PM EST
    the whole presentation was sarcasm. He thinks jury may disregard due to that.

    I know it's not funny (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by cboldt on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 04:27:07 PM EST
    The incident, the charge, the trial, all the "stuff" in between.  I think Bernardo has convinced himself he's on the right side of truth, justice and the American way ... and with all that as backdrop, the thought that his closing was pure sarcasm made me laugh.

    Parent
    I just read something interesting (none / 0) (#154)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:09:32 PM EST
    on Twitter by a FL lawyer. She said this prosecutor (I don't know if she meant BDLR or Corey) has more blacks on death row than any other prosecutor in FL.

    Also, they dismiss the alternates tomorrow. If a juror can't continue, they go with 5 (if the "parties"-I guess defense and prosecution?) agree. If they don't agree, they retry. I'd say the alternates will go into hiding, but it might be interesting if one speaks.

    My recollection is... (none / 0) (#169)
    by bmaz on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:34:24 PM EST
    ...that is Angela Corey, but I am not positive.

    Parent
    Is the trancript of today's closing argument (none / 0) (#157)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:10:55 PM EST
    available on line?

    In the second hour, did the prosecutor (none / 0) (#168)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:31:34 PM EST
    do a side by side visual comparison of defendant's statements?

    The closing. (none / 0) (#171)
    by Angel on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 06:44:14 PM EST
    Bernie's Closing My 2 Cts (none / 0) (#198)
    by DennisD on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:13:47 PM EST
    I thought that in some respects he did a good job but it was mostly overreaching argument that either neglected, misrepresented, or skirted evidence. I also had to laugh that he paraphrased MLK and quoted Sherlock Holmes/Doyle.

    I don't think O'Mara will have a lot of trouble taking Bernie's argument to task. I also expect him to make much greater use of the testimony and evidence which will show the hollowness of much of Bernie's closing.

    Cheney Mason just said on CNN (none / 0) (#205)
    by Teresa on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 08:36:22 PM EST
    (he's tried murder cases for 40 years in FL and was an attorney for Casey Anthony) just said he won't be surprised at all by a manslaughter verdict.

    Not because the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but because in his experience, when there's a killing, and there's no doubt who did it, juries normally want someone to be held accountable for it.

    So I'm back to saying I believe that will happen. Mainly because, they jury has no idea about 30 years or more in prison. Even if it wasn't proved.

    He also laid it on the line and pulled no punches about race. He said people need to quit beating around the bush. This case IS about race he said. He said look at the TV commentators, black ones have one view and white ones mostly another and anyone who won't admit that is lying to themselves. You can always depend on him to be direct.

    So reasonable doubt may exist by a long shot and still get a guilty verdict. He thinks they didn't prove it, but said that's his experience with juries. He thinks a very sort deliberation, too. Another lawyer down there predicts 3 hours and Not Guilty so I guess we'll see. He think O'Mara will do a good job of bringing up what reasonable doubt is.