A neighbor, John Good, who witnessed the fight between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman has just devastated the State’s case, testifying that he saw the fight between the two, that Trayvon was on top punching Mixed Martial Arts style, and that the scream must have come from Zimmerman because Zimmerman was on the bottom and Trayvon was faced away from the witness.
#Zimmerman Trial Day 5: Good: Up on sidewalk is when straddle position and arm movements coming downwards. http://t.co/Aarq3FMHVA
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 28, 2013
#Zimmerman Trial Day 5: Good: "Ground-and-pound" first thing that came tomy mind. http://t.co/Aarq3FMHVA
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 28, 2013
#Zimmerman Trial Day 5: Good's testimony on cross is TOTALLY as recounted b y Zimmerman http://t.co/Aarq3FMHVA
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 28, 2013
O'Mara: #Trayvon was raining down blows on #Zimmerman? "That's what it looked like."
— Rene Stutzman (@renestutzman) June 28, 2013
John Good: darker-skinned person was doing "ground & pound" on fella on bottom. #Trayvon, #Zimmerman
— Rene Stutzman (@renestutzman) June 28, 2013
https://twitter.com/renestutzman/status/350620377791201280
JGood: Cries for help seemed to come from man on bottom, who was #Zimmerman, #Trayvon
— Rene Stutzman (@renestutzman) June 28, 2013
O'Mara: You described position as MMA-style "ground and pound?" Good: "That's what it looked like, yes." #GeorgeZimmerman #TrayvonMartin
— Jeff Weiner (@JeffWeinerOS) June 28, 2013
Good says he believes all the screams were coming from #Zimmermanon9
— Kathi Belich (@KathiBelich) June 28, 2013
#Zimmerman Trial Day 5: Recounted that night that guy on bottom in red was getting beat up http://t.co/Aarq3FMHVA
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 28, 2013
#Zimmerman Trial Day 5:O'Mara driving home the consistency of Good's many statements, contrasts with Jeantel, etc. http://t.co/Aarq3FMHVA
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 28, 2013
JGood looks @ photo of #Trayvon's hoodie as he stood in 7-11. Guy on top was wearing "same colors". #Zimmerman
— Rene Stutzman (@renestutzman) June 28, 2013
#Zimmerman Trial Day 5: Person on top dressed like person on right (7-11 photo)? Yes. http://t.co/Aarq3FMHVA pic.twitter.com/SPUB1m58eh
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 28, 2013
Full coverage, Zimmerman Trial LIVE VIDEO – Day 5 – State’s Witnesses
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
MMA ground and pound? Aw, this witness just doesn’t understand who Tray-von is. He’s black. He’s authentic. No amount of facts will change that the jury MUST find GZ guilty of the capital crime of defending himself against a black Tray-von while looking like a ‘cracker’.
This witness also does not understand that the guy pounding on top would look like Obama’s son, if Obama had a son, and that Obama’s son would never do such a thing.
Or IF Obama’s son Tray-von did such a thing, it would naturally be justified because of slavery and white oppression.
I have seen the pictures. Do you expect me to believe that a “12 year old” could do that? It is obvious that the recoil from the pistol broke Zimmerman’s nose, throwing him back so that he cut his head on the sidewalk.
you forgot the sarcasm tag
}}} you forgot the sarcasm tag
That or the “absolute liberal moron” tag.
They hardly EVER use that one like they should…
Then again, they **are** morons…
Well, I’d say that was the ol’ ball game, right there.
Explain to me again why the prosecution called this witness?
That was my first thought. It really is beginning to look like the prosecutors just want to get this turkey of a case they were handed over and done with so they can go on with their lives and try to salvage their careers and reputations.
By Jove, maybe you’re right!
Maybe the prosecutors aren’t as unethical as I thought. Maybe it is only their bosses who are unethical. Maybe they are simply going to throw their cards out on the table one by one and see what happens.
That is what I would do if ordered to try this stinkbomb — a passive/aggressive dial-it-in performance.
Bernie’s loudmouth who-cares courtroom demeanor is starting to look like maybe he is just angry at having to be there, period.
He should be.
Is anyone else thinking of Brad Pitt’s character in Sleepers? When does the priest appear with the Knicks ticket stubs?
Cuz they don’t have a case and thought the witness would provide one?
The prosecution knew that the witness would be called by the defense and would be devastating for the state. Strategically, it was better to call him as an adverse witness and get first crack at him. If they did not call him, then his testimony would have more of an impact on the jury when the defense called him.
}}} then his testimony would have more of an impact on the jury when the defense called him.
That seems unreasonable given that this testimony should have people looking at the judge and asking “Why is this **racist** FARCE wasting The Peoples’ time and money in the first place, Judge? You had to have known of this testimony months ago. Why did you not throw out the case?”
I am not sure why the State called Mr. Good. I suspect that they were concerned that if they had not called him, it would look as though they were not honest and were trying to withhold crucial evidence from the jury.
This is the most curious prosecution that I have ever seen with the prosecutor attacking in redirect the credibility of the last several witnesses he called. Occasionally, I have seen the state surprised by the actual testimony of its witness because their testimony was inconsistent with prior statements given to the police. Here the state seems totally aware of what the witnesses testimony will be and then comes back and attacks them. Has anyone ever seen that before?
Mr Good is obviously racissssssssssss.
Truth emerges. Suck on it, you lying Leftist smear merchants.
I’m fully convinced rhorton was trolling and it just isn’t funny for he/she anymore after today’s witness.
I googled the name horton by the way and didn’t find anyone of substantive value in litigation or even a decent practicing lawyer with an initial r. If you’re going to pose as a know it all lawyer at least pick the name of someone good at it.
Oh, many…most…of us labor in the fields in quiet anonymity. And some of us prefer it that way.
Understandably so..I myself use a fairly anonymous name as do you. Notice my name does not have the semblance of an initial and last name. If you are truly anonymous, why make it look like you are not?
Second, he has attempted to portray himself throughout this blog as an experienced trial lawyer with expertise in criminal litigation and now he thinks he’s explaining how murder charges work. People in those fields don’t fade into obscurity (can be googled) unless horton is using a fake name.
My point is if you are going to go fake and troll then why make up a name designed to appears as non-anonymous but of no one of importance. Someone with this much arrogance of their own opinion should clearly pick a name that belies their imaginary credibility.
The Internet:
“Am I an astronaut? No, no! That was last week. This week I’m a lawyer!”
I use my real name.
So…Welsh ancestry…???
myiq2xu = “My IQ is twice as high as yours.”
Well, my IQ is only 40, so yours is just 80. Hahaha, that makes you like some kind of moron. Joke’s on you. Hahahaha.
Changed it Metta World Peace style I see.
}}} myiq2xu = “My IQ is twice as high as yours.”
Well, first off, it’s missing the plural “s” at the end:
“myiq2xus”
Second, there’s no human on the planet with 2x my IQ, which, well, Q.E.D., above. :-9
P.S., also, far more inventive was a trivia player who played under the name “One Mug”.
Translate it to “sort of” German, if you didn’t see it right off.
THAT is brilliant.
Pick Me!! Pick MEEEE!!!
This is crazy, have any of the State’s witnesses helped their case?
The T Mobile guy was pretty good for them.
Naw… I think the Verizon guy was the least damaging.
And yet there will probably still be riots if/when GZ is found not guilty.
Sadly, you are not mistaken. The media taking this issue as a cause celeb, and repeatedly incorrectly characterizing what is occurring in court stokes the fires of the ill-educated masses and sets up a travesty of justice when he is acquitted.
With all due respect, may I suggest that those who will be demonstrating/rioting if a “not guilty” verdict is issued are not really concerned whether or not Zimmerman was acting in self-defense.
They outrage is solely from the fact that a person who is not Black killed a person who is Black. They couldn’t care less about the circumstances.
If Zimmerman had been Black, Al Sharpton would have never led demonstrations and the trial would have never happened.
Zimmerman has a black heritage. He has a heritage that is Afro-Peruvian. It is wrong to claim that he is white because he is of mixed race.
But… but… he looks white.
That’s all that matters!
The state still has more evidence to present so it is premature to speculate on verdicts. So far, however, the State has not explained the undisputed physical evidence that is entirely consistent with Zimmerman’s account. Now with Good’s testimony, essential portions of Zimmerman’s account just prior to the shooting are collaborated by a very credible eye witness who was called by the state.
Given the current state of the evidence, I cannot see how the state could obtain a murder 2 conviction. I am curious to hear from criminal law experts whether on the current state of the record the State could survive a directed verdict motion on the murder 2 charge?
Obviously, the lesser included manslaughter is still in play, but I suspect just barely.
Honestly, I dont care who was on top or was getting beat up. The fact still remains if Zimmerman would have stayed in his car none of this would have happened.
Is it now illegal to get out of your car in the presence of young black males who might attack you MMA style?
“, , , if Zimmerman would have stayed in his car none of this would have happened.”
And if Trayvon had not gone out to the grocery store, none of this would have happened.
}}} And if Trayvon had not gone out to the grocery store, none of this would have happened.
Exactly. Zim had just as much, if not MORE (he was an actual resident, while Trayvon was a “visitor”) right to be there.
The only question here, really, is who approached whom. That’s the ONLY element which could possibly shine any dark light on Zim’s acts that night. And appearances are that’s pretty much known only to Zim.
And that still does not change the fact that Trayvon was clearly beating the crap out of Zimmerman, so Zimmerman had a right of self-defense in fear for his life.
I’m so envious. I never had a day like O’Mara just had in court.
(The State should stand up now and move for a dismissal.)
Going back to the Frye hearings, he’s had a pretty good couple of weeks.
You guys act as if people on the left, like me, can’t follow the law and know this is a travesty. It’s also a tragedy for the families, but GZ should never have been charged by Florida law. I agree with the person above that a not guilty verdict will cause protests. That worries me because the jury may be fearful, as John Good obviously was/is.
If the media was honest, and didn’t bring out numerous, mostly black, commentors who are all pro-guilty, maybe people wouldn’t be upset IF the jury has the guts to come back not guilty.
Unfortunately you are the exception. What we mostly experience are low information liberals gleefully spouting the latest thing they heard on MSNBC.
}}}}}}}} You guys act as if people on the left, like me, can’t follow the law and know this is a travesty. It’s also a tragedy for the families, but GZ should never have been charged by Florida law.
}}} Unfortunately you are the exception.
Exactly. It was obvious this was a racist witchhunt two weeks after the event. And all too many liberals are incapable of stepping out of frothing-attack mode.
As a conservative (not a republican), you sound completely credible to me (on this issue).
If the court officers do their jobs well, the jury should be insulated from the media and their families so outside happenings should not be of concern…hearing it from John may give them a brief pause but I have to believe most people in this country still want to do what they believe is the right thing.
I will admit that “we” are used to seeing liberals as a group slam the door shut on this lazily without knowing the facts of the case or what is actually happening. Minority groups are doing the same out of blind rage and aspirations of racism. Liberals that aren’t crying racism are doing the same out of blind rage and aspirations of grandstanding on boosting gun control. If that has made anyone here a bit defensive towards you, I’m sure they would apologize.
Hey, fsu. No one has been rude to me at all. I was just speaking in generalities.
The jurors are insulated NOW from the media, but they weren’t before. I find it very hard to believe, except possibly the juror who just moved from Chicago, that they didn’t know of the marches, etc., regarding this case.
I know I would do the right thing if I were on the jury, but I don’t have faith that six out of six will. That’s sad and I blame the media more than anyone else. I wonder what trial they’re watching. It can’t be this one except short clips a producer might show them. Or they came into the case with opinions already formed and it’s coming through loud and clear in their reporting.
I have noticed that criminal defense lawyers, who are Democrats, know this is bullsh*t. Talkleft is one example, though the commenters there are mixed as to viewpoints.
}}} I know I would do the right thing if I were on the jury, but I don’t have faith that six out of six will.
Ummm… Twelve. Six for a civil trial, twelve for criminal trials.
And there is no way in HELL they can get a conviction from 12 people based just on this lone testimony. The prosecution should just give in.
P.S., EVERYONE here should be fully familiar with their Rights and Obligations as jurors:
The Fully Informed Jury Association
http://www.fija.org
The courts and the prosecutions will openly LIE to you about this, and the defense is forbidden by jurisprudence to mention it. So don’t let them stack the deck.
Know Your Rights.
Juries truly ARE, next to guns, the very last stand against tyranny. They have the power to nullify the application of any law they feel is wrong.
OK, I stand corrected. WTF? Why are there only six jurors in an obvious criminal case?
@ OB Hell –
In Sunny Florida, youse only gets six jurors ….. unless it’s either:
o a capital case (death being a possible sentence), or
o a case of eminent domain
So decreed, in their wisdom, by the legislature and Governor of Florida.
Connecticut is the same.
Let’s hope John Good has gotten some Israeli Self-Defense and Firearms training and bought himself a Magpul-FGM9 or a Magpul Masada or a Taurus Judge and a lot of ammo.
LoriL, you are correct because there are other people with views that are moderate left who feel the same. Perhaps you are more in the middle than you think. Most people from either side of politics are in the middle, and they are neither left nor right… besides, what is really the right happens to be the right of left of centre.
Lori, re: “If the media was honest, and didn’t bring out numerous, mostly black, commentors who are all pro-guilty, maybe people wouldn’t be upset IF the jury has the guts to come back not guilty.”
And herein lies the rub: The news media has been dishonest for more than thirty years that I personally know of. They’re simply doing what they’ve been doing for decades– shaping public opinion by pushing their view and leaving out important information. And people say that Fox is biased… at least Fox commentators tell you up front when they are conservative.
Ch9 still somehow believes Mr. Good helped the prosecution.
It is truly amazing. Did they see the same trial I saw?
Paid Political Announcements.
He reminds me of Dick Morris on election night unwilling to admit defeat.
Wow, I’m surprised to see this witness during the State’s examination. I assumed John would be a defense witness.
The State’s case is destroyed. Now I’m wondering if the State doesn’t care if it wins or loses, but plans to let the juror take the hit if Zimmerman is found innocent, OR if the State is simply using this sham trial to get the truth out to the public and, hopefully, avoid riots.
The prosecution pretty much had to call him. They knew that the defense would call him and that his testimony would wreck the state’s case. By calling him as an adverse witness they get first crack at him and can follow his testimony with other witnesses. They can also argue that they are hiding nothing. If the prosecution did not call him, then when the defense called him it would have had more of an impact on the jury.
If you pick a fight and start getting beat up you do not become the victim. You were the aggressor and you got beat up. Trayvon is still the victim he is the one dead here. You cannot claim self defense because you are getting beat up. Trayvon is the one who was defending himself.
And you have evidence that Zimmerman started the fight? Any whatsoever?
Mae,
May I call you that?
It doesn’t matter who started the fight. What matters is: was George in fear of his life? Getting your head pounded on concrete is life threatening. Trayvon did not stop after being told to by an outside observer.
Self defense.
Of course you can get in the street and protest. What do you think the body count will be if Zimmerman is acquitted? One? One hundred? How many blocks lost to arson?
Maybe if more people had guns Trayvon would think twice before assaulting someone. He could even have used one, and he certainly tried to, according to Zimmerman. I shudder to think what little Tray tray could have gotten up to with a gun.
Think about it: Having more people with guns would have saved Trayvon’s life!
Anyhow, if you had it your way, all it would mean is that Trayvon would be the one on trial
Actually, based upon his injuries, Zimmerman was the victim.
BTW there is no proof that Zimmerman picked the fight.
So when will Benjamin Crump and Al Sharpton be brought up on charges?
(I kill myself sometimes…..)
They called him for a couple of reasons. One, they know he’s a strong witness for the defense so they wanted to get ahead of that and not have him called up by the defense to dramatically rebut their entire defense. Two, they had to do something to stop the bleeding from all of their witnesses who have been discredited. They tried to equate his elaborating on and clarifying what he had already said with their inconsistencies. I think they were moderately successful with that. However, of all the witnesses he’s the only one who went outside rather than watching through a window, and the only one who seems to be perfectly clear on who was on top prior to the gunshot.
Can you clarify what you mean by the word “moderately”? I would say modestly is a better adverb.
I thought that John being forthright with both lawyers about not seeing fists hit face improved his credibility.
This “emphasis” by BDLR did create a slight distance between the defense’s narrative and the area of uncertainty in this eyewitness’s account. However, I believe the boost to John’s credibility by being very forthright and honest outweighs the subtle difference between someone seeing fists thrown and someone actually experiencing the fists striking them. That subtlety will then be essentially erased by the evidence from Zimmerman’s injuries and Trayvon’s knuckles.
I am no lawyer and make no pretense to be one unlike others here. This is just an educated man’s opinion as a casual observer in an unrelated field.
Yes, maybe modestly is a better word. But the opening is there to explain the inconsistencies in the stories of the state’s witnesses, especially Rachel Jeantel. I think overall Good has much more credibility, although reading news stories today it appears some have the impression that on her basic story, she stuck to her guns. Not the impression I got at all, but we’ll see who makes the better argument later on in the trial.
I’m no lawyer either by the way, just a legal junkie. My husband always says I should have been one
Right now this really looks bad for the state. Can anyone tell me if the jury is showing any signs of seeing what is happening? I realize no one can read thier minds but I’m also hoping what I’m reading isn’t a bunch of wishful thinking.
Stutzman and Weiner must be livid. They have been pushing the guilt of GZ from the start. This witness just blows that right out of the water. I wonder how she will try to spin this when interviewed in the morning.
Apparently you’re assuming the State wants a guilty verdict. A guilty verdict won’t rill up the ignorant masses who have been prepped by 25 years of racial angst and intolerance by the practitioners of ‘diversity’ in the media and the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton offices.
A not guilty verdict, however, will get the ignorant fools around the country to pound the streets and create the theatrics that media expects and wants so they can get more Democrats and socialists to the voting booth for 2014. Maybe the race hustlers can then get more $$$$$$$ for their pockets, maybe the Democrats get more votes, but the country will definitely be damaged–which is the goal of every Democrat and liberal.
I’m here to say, as a former detective, if this were a police officer on the ground, without any medium weapons like a taser but only his weapon as a tool, he could shoot Martin dead and it would be ruled a good shoot.
Why?
Because every police officer on the planet knows just how little it takes to be knocked unconscious, and your weapon taken to kill you with, and how easy it is to be killed from a single blow to your head or you head pounced off concrete.
Not to mention the permanent injuries like loss of vision or broken jaws.
The only difference is we are trained to keep shooting until the bad guy is stopped, Martin would have taken four or five round to the chest, which mean Zimmerman was using restraint.
Even if the jury was predisposed to convict, wanted to convict, the State has to give them at least somthing to chew on!
“O’Mara Law Group, how may I help you?”
“Hi, this is Bernie with the DA’s office. Do you have any witnesses we could borrow?”
“Mr. O’Mara says he’ll send some right over.”
“Gee, that’d be great. Thanks!”
“No — thank YOU!”
The useful idiots will riot, but the race-baiter professionals win either way:
If Zimmerman is convicted, it’s proof of a race-hate murder and that racism exists.
However, if Zimmerman is acquitted, it’s proof of a race-hate murder and that racism exists.
Given what’s been happening to the State, it almost seems like Mike Nelson and crew need to revive Mystery Science Theatre 3000 just to ridicule them.
Tom Servo would certainly add to the intellectual heft of the prosecution team.
[…] prosecution called neighbor John Good to the stand. He testified that he saw the fight between Martin and Zimmerman, and that he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, […]
If the media don’t start reporting this story accurately, and if GZ is acquitted as he should be, blood will be on their hands.
Bernie just mischaracterized. He said Mr. West said GZ was defending himself and the witness couldn’t know that. West said that GZ TOLD the witness that and the witness agreed. Why no objection to misstating what West said?
[…] Legal Insurrection: Zimmerman trial blockbuster — Eyewitness says Trayvon on top punching Mixed Martial Arts style: […]
What’s really disheartening is there could be video proof of the events – and George Zimmerman could still be in a coma from the results of this beating – and a large segment of the population still wouldn’t believe it.
Or worse? That Zimmerman deserved it.
This will not end well. Mark my words.
[…] Zimmerman trial blockbuster – Eyewitness says Trayvon on top punching Mixed Martial Arts style […]
[…] case has not shaken the prime factual basis for a finding of not guilty — Trayvon Martin was on top of George Zimmerman punching him at the time of the shot. At best for the prosecution, there is […]