Image 01 Image 03

Noted Forensic Pathologist Says Zimmerman Story “Consistent” with Evidence, As Defense Case Nears End

Noted Forensic Pathologist Says Zimmerman Story “Consistent” with Evidence, As Defense Case Nears End

By far the biggest news of the day came mid-afternoon when defense attorney Mark O’Mara informed Judge Nelson that his next witness, Elouise Dilligard, would be his last of the trial, and that he expected the defense to rest their case tomorrow. Given the expectations of many, including this lawyer, that the defense would drive their case forward through the entire week, this news came as a considerable surprise.

Noted forensic pathologist, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, testifying for the defense

Noted forensic pathologist, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, testifying for the defense

The expectations of a lengthy defense case, however, had been set following the mid-trial motions for a judgment of acquittal, during which the State ruthlessly twisted evidence and fabricated facts in their desperate efforts to avoid a JOA they richly deserved.  In the several days since the defense case has simply brutalized what little of the State’s theory of the case had survived through last week.  O’Mara may simply have decided that to continue to beat this dead horse would be counterproductive, in that it might begin to alienate a jury that has been sequestered since the start of the trial proper.

The most interesting of today’s defense witnesses were Dr. Vincent Di Maio, forensic pathologist, and Ms. Elouise Dilligard, a friendly neighbor of Zimmerman’s.

Dr. Vincent Di Maio, Forensic Pathologist

It seemed to take the entire first hour of Dr. Di Maio’s testimony simply to work though his background and credentials.  He has spent on the order of 40 years working as a forensic pathologist, having personally conducted some 9,000 autopsies and overseen tens of thousands more.  Defense attorney stepped through these qualifications in his usual deliberative manner.

In addition to his work conducting autopsies, Dr. Di Maio had also served in the military in a capacity in which he was able to study terminal ballistics and gun shot wounds.  He stepped through the process by which a gun fires a cartridge, focusing particularly on the matter ejected from the muzzle, including the hot expanding gases, the bullet, and unburned gun powder.

Zimmerman’s Muzzle Not Pressed Into Martin’s Body

He noted that the autopsy report noted a 2″ x 2″ area of gun powder tattooing (from unburnt gun powder) around the gun shot wound on Trayvon Martin’s chest.  He was able to determine from this that them muzzle of the Mr. Zimmerman’s Kel-Tech PF9 had been between 2″ and 4″ from Mr. Martin’s chest.  He was also able to definitely exclude the State’s claim that the muzzle of the gun had been pressed against Martin’s chest, because in that case the unburnt gun powder would have ended up in the wound rather than on Mr. Martin’s skin.

ME Bao’s Collection and Preservation of Evidence Disastrously Flawed

West also had Dr. Di Maio testify as to matters of evidence collection and preservation, particularly the wet clothes that had been stored in plastic bags (thus degrading any DNA that might have otherwise been detectable), the failure to bag Trayvon Martin’s hands in order to properly preserve any evidence there (such as Mr. Zimmerman’s DNA on Martin’s knuckles), and the fact that the photos taken by Medical Examiner Bao were only taken after Martin’s body had already been washed.  This undercuts a variety of State claims, including that the lack of Zimmerman’s DNA on Martin’s hands suggests that Martin did not, in fact beat Zimmerman around the head.  In essence, this line of questioning should have destroyed whatever little remaining confidence the jury might have still held in the testimony of Dr. Bao.

Martin Would Have Been Able to Pull Hands Under Body After Shooting

Dr. Di Maio further testified as to how long Mr. Martin might have been able to have controlled movements considering the injuries caused to his heart by Mr. Zimmerman’s bullet, indicating a minimum period of 10 to 15 seconds.  This would have been more than enough time for Martin to pull his hands in under his body.  This undercuts the State’s argument that Zimmerman must be lying when he said he moved Martin’s hands away from his body.

Injuries to Zimmerman’s Head Were Potentially Life Threatening

Further testimony from Dr. Di Maio emphasized the life-threatening danger of blows to the head.  He noted that intracranial bleeding is hidden, and often does not cause death until some hours after the injury that caused it.  He also noted that axonal injury can occur even besides bleeding, causing brain damage.  This undermines the State’s arguments that the blows to Zimmermans’ head were inconsequential and could  not h ave represented the reasonable threat of death or grave bodily harm necessary to justify Zimmerman’s use of deadly force in self-defense.

BDLR’s Cross-Examination–Odd, As Usual

On cross-examination by State prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda the focus of the State was largely on matters that Dr. Di Maio did not know, and could not have known unless he had actually been physically present at the time of the shooting.

Perhaps the strangest aspect of BDLR’s cross was the way it kept beating on the theme of uncertainty.  Dr. Di Maio had presented one possibility, BDLR argued, but isn’t it true that there was a second possibility, and a third possibility?  How such a cross was intended to drive the jury closer towards proof beyond a reasonable doubt is unclear.

BDLR also repeated his tendency to ask questions on cross to which he clearly didn’t know the answer, and getting “blown up” by the reply.  In his direct testimony Dr. Di Maio had mentioned studying gunshot patterns on live animals.  Now BDLR acted aghast that Dr. Di Maio would have harmed poor innocent little beasts (the fact that there is at least one serious pet owner on the jury may have promoted this line of questioning).

No worries, Dr. Di Maio assured him, the experiments were all run using a Federally-approved methodology, in a Federally-approved facility.

BDLR also assailed Dr. Di Maio’s opinion on the nature and extent of Zimmerman’s injuries, saying that the notes of the emergency medical people who treated Zimmerman had not indicated such serious injuries.  Di Maio explained with some patience that ambulance crews are focused overwhelmingly on treating the patient, not taking exhaustive and accurate notes.

The questioning then swung rather bizarrely over to whether the injuries to Mr. Zimmerman’s head might have been caused by a tree or a sprinkler box, rather than the sidewalk.  Given the punctate nature of several of the injuries it was rather obvious that the rough surface of the sidewalk, known to be in the immediate vicinity of the fighting, was most likely to have caused the injuries that would a hypothetical tree or sprinkler box.

Severity of Zimmerman’s Injuries Re-Emphasized on Re-Direct

On re-direct by cross, the focus shifted back to the seriousness of Zimmerman’s injuries.  Dr. Di Maio noted that sporting events have physicians on the sidelines specifically because of how dangerous head injuries can be.  He also noted that it is not uncommon for a person who has suffered a head injury to appear to be OK for some hours, only to die as a result.  “The police should have taken Zimmerman to the hospital.”

On Re-Cross BDLR Seems to Foster, Rather Than Reduce, Reasonable Doubt

On re-cross, BDLR hit Di Maio with a blizzard of questions, each hypothesizing some alternative explanation of the forensic evidence to that proposed by Dr. Di Maio.  Again, this would not seem likely to move the jury to eliminate a reasonable doubt.  In any case, Dr. Di Maio simply repeated his statement that the forensic evidence was consistent with George Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense, and that was the issue on which he was in court to opine.

To sum up, Dr. Di Maio’s testimony was extremely favorable to the defense, and quite destructive to the State.

Dr. Vincent Di Maio, Forensic Pathologist, Part 2

Dr. Vincent Di Maio, Forensic Pathologist, Part 3

Dr. Vincent Di Maio, Forensic Pathologist, Part 4

Dr. Vincent Di Maio, Forensic Pathologist, Part 5

Elouise Dilligard, Friendly Neighbor of Zimmerman

The next most interesting witness today was the defense’s last witness, Elouise Dilligard.  Ms. Dilligard was ill in bed at home, and was “brought into” court via the use of Apple Facetime.  She was a neighbor of the Zimmerman’s at Twin Lakes, and had driven upon the scene while the police were still present.  She testified as to the location of Zimmerman’s truck and some other small matters, including having been shown at the scene a photos on an iPhone of both Zimmerman and Trayvon. She was able to identify Zimmerman, and spoke to his bloody injuries.

By far the most important aspect of her testimony, however, was not the actual words, but who was saying them and how they were said.  Elouise Dilligard described George Zimmerman as a friendly neighbor, and her testimony as to how she sought to locate Shellie Zimmerman to tell her what had happened, and then returned later that night to check up on the Zimmerman’s again, spoke to her affection for the couple.

Elouise Dilligard is also an African-American woman.  Having this older black woman, calling into court from her sick bed, testify with such affection for the Zimmerman’s and George in particular, completelly gutted the State’s characterization of George Zimmerman as some kind of seething racist who was actively seeking out a black boy to kill.

Eloise Dilligard, Friendly Neighbor of Zimmerman, Part 2

Eloise Dilligard, Friendly Neighbor of Zimmerman, Part 3

Daubert Hearing: Animated Video

Another matter taken up by the court today, but still left unaddressed as of this writing, is the Daubert hearing on whether to admit the animated recreation produced by the defense.  The defense naturally wants this video to be admitted as evidence, not merely as a demonstrative, and the State is vehemently opposed.

Zimmerman expert animation screenshot position of bodies

Still capture of defense’ animated recreation.

Zimmerman expert animation 2after shot position Selma Mora view


Zimmerman expert animation after shot position 3

This morning’s testimony on the matter (embedded below) was halted before completion by Judge Nelson, as she had felt the jurors had been kept waiting long enough, and is currently being heard again now that the jury has been dismissed for the day.

Daubert Hearing: Animated Video, Part 2

Daubert Hearing: Animated Video, Part 3

Daubert Hearing: Animated Video, Part 4

Daubert Hearing: Animated Video, Part 5

Norton Bonaparte, Jr. City Manager

The only remaining witness of the day was Norton Bonaparte, the Sanford City Manager.  He was questioned by O’Mara on the nature of the playing of the Jenna Lauer 911 tape (and other tapes) for the Martin family and their lawyers in the Sanford Mayor’s office.   Although much of the background for this event seems cloaked in an in limine order.

It did emerge through Bonaparte’s testimony, however,  that the reason no law enforcement officers were present during the playing of the tapes–as would normally be the case–was at the direct request of the Martin family.

Expectations for Tomorrow

The defense seems prepared to rest its case tomorrow, but only after making a proffer or several pieces of evidence. One of these will be the animated recreation that is the subject of today’s Daubert hearing.

Another issue to be taken up by the Court tomorrow is an 8:00AM hearing to discuss the matter of defense witness Donnelly apparently having sat in the courtroom and observed testimony of other witnesses before testifying himself. The State seems to wish to strike Donnelly’s compelling testimony identifying the screamer on the Jenna Lauer 911 tape as George Zimmerman, as they have previously attempted.

The whole matter, however, seems overblown. First, the State will need to show that the defense orchestrated Donnelly’s presence, or at least was only negligently unaware of his presence, in order to have a chance at the most extreme remedy of striking Donnelly’s testimony. Second, the State will have to show that they were prejudiced in some manner by Donnelly’s earlier presence in the courtroom, an argument they already failed at before Judge Nelson on other grounds. Finally, the very act of ordering the jury to not consider Donnelly’s testimony only serves to refresh the jury’s recollection of that testimony immediately prior to the jury being instructed.

That’s it for today. Don’t forget to join us again tomorrow for our all-day live coverage of the court testimony, all public hearings (starting at 8:00AM for the Donnelly hearing), as well as our scrolling Twitter feed of selected contributors.

–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

Andrew F. Branca is an MA lawyer and author of the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense,” now available in its just released 2nd Edition, which shows you how to successfully fight the 20-to-life legal battle everyone faces after defending themselves. Take advantage of the 20% “Zimmerman trial” discount & free shipping (ends when the jury returns a verdict). NRA & IDPA members can also use checkout coupon LOSD2-NRA for an additional 10% off. To do so simply visit the Law of Self Defense blog. (Coupon works ONLY at
Note also that “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition” is also available at  They set their own price, and it can very each day, so you might want to check there to see if they are offering the best deal today.

Many thanks to Professor Jacobson for the invitation to guest-blog on the Zimmerman trial here on Legal Insurrection!

You can follow Andrew on Twitter on @LawSelfDefense (or @LawSelfDefense2 if I’m in Twitmo, follow both!)on Facebook, and at his blog, The Law of Self Defense.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


BannedbytheGuardian | July 9, 2013 at 6:44 pm

Although they are still using 11 years Tray pics – the foreign coverage is veering towards dismissal/ lesser charge spin.

BannedbytheGuardian | July 9, 2013 at 6:45 pm

Correction – not dismissal – non conviction.

Game, set, match

VetHusbandFather | July 9, 2013 at 6:50 pm

My guess is that the defense wants to show the video to give the jury a more accurate estimation of the timing of events/how long it would have taken for people to get from one place to another etc. Drawings and diagrams give some idea of this, especially if you are a spacial person. But I think the adding in time will make one thing pretty obvious, there really wasn’t any time for anything to happen, except how GZ described it.

    DuraMater in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 9, 2013 at 7:15 pm

    Agreed. Unless the visual happens to also depict the distance from the “T” (where Z. first lost sight of Travon) to Brandy’s house. This would clearly illustrate Trayvon had “time” to run home before encountering Z at the T. Would further the scenario that Trayvon was the stalker laying in wait to ambush and assault Zim.

byondpolitics | July 9, 2013 at 6:51 pm

Thanks again for your excellent coverage. Your insights have been enormously helpful.

I believe when Mr. O’Mara said that she was the “last” witness, he meant “for the day” and not for the trial.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to byondpolitics. | July 9, 2013 at 7:19 pm

    I understood him to say that it was his last witness and all they had left was the proffer or whatever that word is and then they would rest tomorrow.

byondpolitics | July 9, 2013 at 6:51 pm

Thanks again for your excellent coverage. Your insights have been enormously helpful.

I believe when Mr. O’Mara said that she was the “last” witness, he meant “for the day” and not for the trial.

Yeah, they’re all showing that OLD photo. I emailed all the Fox news shows last night … I saw that photo one too many times … at least on Greta’s show last night, she showed a slide show of Martin at various ages, not just the one angelic little face of several years ago. I pointed out how prejudicial this was due to the fact that some of the witnesses testified that they thought it was Z on top because he was “MUCH LARGER THAN MARTIN” and this was BASED ON PHOTOGRAPHS THEY HAD SEEN IN THE MEDIA! Made blood shoot out of my eyeballs.

Great reporting, as usual.

The defense has done a far better job of proving Zimmerman’s innocence than the prosecution did of proving his guilt.

This case never should have been filed.

When Bernie brought up the live animals, we knew and he knew it was over. That was pure desperation.

Gremlin1974 | July 9, 2013 at 7:18 pm

“O’Mara may simply have decided that to continue to beat this dead horse would be counterproductive”

I think this is the real reason, especially in light of the fact that when he announced that they would be resting tomorrow he actually said something to the effect of; “Since we have gotten the testimony we wanted”. Since the State did such a good job of disproving most of its own theories there is no reason to keep going.

healthguyfsu | July 9, 2013 at 7:20 pm

It’s been posted before but I want to make sure everyone has a chance to see the true intentions of the “Martins”

    creeper in reply to healthguyfsu. | July 9, 2013 at 7:57 pm

    I’ve been trying to give Sybrina Fulton the benefit of the doubt on trademarking TM’s name, since many here say that is common practice. This linked post puts her money-grubbing in a whole new light.

    Thank you.

So are they not going to bring up Martin’s pot use on the day of the killing?

    Jim in reply to Mercyneal. | July 9, 2013 at 7:35 pm

    It would appear that way. I believe the consensus here was that the advantage gained likely did not outweigh the potential disadvantages of giving the prosecution an opening with which to hammer the “smearing the victim” nail. I think the defense agreed with that.

There’s one thing I really don’t understand: how could the animation be admitted as anything other than demonstrative evidence? What about it would make it something other than that?

Mr. Branca,

Thanks for your most excellent recap of today’s court.

The prosecution focus on striking Mr. Donnelly’s testimony indicates that they believe it drove a stake through the heart of their case. A Court that uses the very extreme sanction of striking key exculpatory testimony in a criminal case, sets itself up for a not very pretty appellate reversal.

As a practical matter, sequestration is impossible in a televised case.

The prosecution, if it were concerned could have objected to Donnelly’s presence, just as it did to the presence of Mr. Zimmerman’s mother. The prosecution was either as negligent as the defense or deliberately overlooked Donnelly’s presence with an eye to raising a later objection.

BDLR should raise his right hand along with MOM and explain why he too failed to notice.

Dr. Di Maio further testified as to how long Mr. Martin might have been able to have controlled movements considering the injuries caused to his heart by Mr. Zimmerman’s bullet, indicating a MINIMUM period of 10 to 15 seconds.


    DuraMater in reply to myiq2xu. | July 9, 2013 at 7:55 pm

    Defensive and decorticate posturing (drawing, flexing upper extremities toward chest)still occurs in diminished level of consciousness (LOC), Glasgow coma scale as low as 7 or 8.

    Bleeding through defects in right ventricle and elevated heart rate would have accelerated rate at which loss of consciousness occurred due to decreased cerebral perfusion. But the amount of O2 reserve in brain was likely augmented by prior intense activity of tussle. These were very important points made by Dr. DiMaio in evaluating whether or not Trayvon’s arms could have spontaneously repositioned after Zimmerman testified he extended the arms after shooting.

    Another important point which I hope was not missed by the jury was the fact that there is a difference between brain death and conscious awareness (or lack of). Dr. Bao attempted to suggest to the jury that Trayvon might have been “suffering” in pain for up to 10 minutes. No scientific bases for that statement.

    Victim was unresponsive, breathless and pulse-less when officer (Smith?) initiated CPR, probably within 3-5 minutes of arriving on scene. Rescue arrived and monitored 10 minutes after shooting and I believe recorded what was probably an agonal rhythm, occasional electrical cardiac event (totally ineffectual and incapable of perfusing vital organs).

    Dr. DiMaio’s estimation of 1-3 minutes was very close to my own (1-2min)for any type of conscious awareness of suffering under the recorded conditions.

BannedbytheGuardian | July 9, 2013 at 7:34 pm

Cutting short a defence can also demonstrate confidence in a case that is seen to be going well .

It can help those come to the conclusion that Prosecution did not prove their case .

I simply had to stop listening to the State’s case on why the animation should not be allowed. The creator of the video was prohibited from observing any testimony because he was going to be a witness. However, the State argued that the animation could not be allowed in because the creator of the animation did not use only information presented in the trial as evidence in the creation of the video. Talk about a Catch-22. It was so disgusting I had to stop watching.

It did emerge through Bonaparte’s testimony, however, that the reason no law enforcement officers were present during the playing of the tapes–as would normally be the case–was at the direct request of the Martin family

THIS bugs me. it needs to investigated no matter the outcome of this trial.

    caambers in reply to dmacleo. | July 9, 2013 at 7:57 pm

    I agree…this is pandering pure and simple. Bonaparte should have told the family no…that proper procedures must be followed. Would he have been so caring to the white family…a Hispanic family…or a white Hispanic family? That guy should lose his job ASAP. So should Triplett for his part in this horrific persecution.

      coregis in reply to caambers. | July 9, 2013 at 9:56 pm

      You make the assumption that Mr. Bonaparte was the one in control of the tapes or made the decision to prevent the police from sitting in on the playing of the tapes.

    Fabi in reply to dmacleo. | July 9, 2013 at 8:20 pm

    Some animals are more equal than others.

“No worries, Dr. Di Maio assured him, the experiments were all run using a Federally-approved methodology, in a Federally-approved facility”

Heh. BDLR is just not very good at his job.

What does JOA stand for? has…

JOA Joint Operating Agreement
JOA Joan of Arc
JOA Joint Operations Area
JOA Journal of Accountancy (AICPA publication)
JOA Joint Operational Area (US DoD)
JOA Joint Operating Area
JOA Joint Ownership Agreement (various companies)
JOA Joint Operational Architecture
JOA Jeune Orchestre Atlantique
JOA Joan of Arse (band)
JOA Java OceanAtlas (software; Oracle Corporation)
JOA Judgement of Acquittal (law)
JOA Joint Occupancy Agreement
JOA Joint Objective Area
JOA Japan Outdoor Adventures (Takasaki, Japan)
JoA Journal of Algebra (Elsevier)
JOA Jog Off Automatic (electric motors)
JOA Journal of Arthroplasty

Never mind, its in context now:

Judgment Of Acquittal,

…Di Maio explained with some patience that ambulance crews are focused…

It was nice that he explained with forbearance the focus of EMS crews.

He MIGHT have been talking about the “patients” on whom they focus.

    Jazzizhep in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 8:13 pm

    i don’t usually like grammar and spelling comments, but that was FUNNY AS HELL

    Benny in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 8:18 pm


    Brother of mine was a first responder at a chemical plant explosion. They had to close it as a Haz-mat scene so he got to spend quality time with two victims without pain meds until they let anybody else in.

    Two guys were conscious the whole time with 95% 3rd degree burns. Jimmy said they had really good boots.

    He probably might have forgotten to check the right boxes on the right form.

So the only thing that remains is the demonstration video? Attorneys here, is it possible the jury will begin deliberations tomorrow or will closing arguments take too long for that to happen?

txantimedia | July 9, 2013 at 8:08 pm

I expect an objection from BDLR at any time. Your honor, I object. Defense is piling on.

If JDN rules the animation can be used for demonstrative purposes only, can some of the edited parts be reinserted b/c of the lower standards of admissibility? Which seems like a very good consolation prize.

I’ve missed something here. What are “demonstrative purposes”? Are there varying degrees of evidence? How can evidence not be evidence, period?

    Jazzizhep in reply to creeper. | July 9, 2013 at 8:19 pm

    Think of it as as demonstration, MOM can use the animation in closing to illustrate the defense’s version of events in a concise (and powerful) manner, but if the animation is considered “evidence” the jury must consider it along with all the other evidence such as testimony. I think.

      Jazzizhep in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 8:23 pm

      For example, if MOM uses a powerpoint to check off all the things the prosecution hasn’t proved beyond reasonable doubt—ill will, GZ as aggressor, not in fear—it is not evidence, just the defense’s opinion of the evidence. Hope it helps

      Ragspierre in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 8:29 pm

      Pretty good! “Demonstrative evidence” is anything that will help the jury understand an issue or fact in the case. You can use it as part of your case-in-chief, and in closing, but it does not go with the jury into deliberations.

      “Evidence” is proof, proffered by either side within the rules of evidence, that will go with the jury into deliberations. It becomes part of the record of the case.

        Jazzizhep in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 8:42 pm

        I be learnin’

        creeper in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 9:50 pm

        Aha! (I think.) So if it’s allowed the jury will get to see that video once but cannot review it in deliberations.

        Just when you think you understand the process something like this comes up.

        Thanks for tackling this, Jazzizhep and to you, Rags, for further clarification.

Sad, but true:

The same folks who say it’s preposterous that a sweet little boy may be prone to random violence are now posting videos (via the police, no less) asking for random sweet little boys NOT TO BE VIOLENT if a not guilty verdict is announced.

The soft bigotry of low expectations?

    Yukio Ngaby in reply to Fabi. | July 9, 2013 at 8:50 pm

    “The soft bigotry of low expectations?”

    No. I think it’s more like the very reasonable expectation that a not guilty verdict will cause riots. I suppose it is hypocrtical.

    The media, black community leaders, and many politicians have been working overtime to push the racial aspects of this case. I think many fear an L.A. Rodney King Case type riot after the decision. I was there for that. It was not pretty.

    Soft bigotry is more like propping up standardized test scores for black students in education, affirmative ation in this day and age, etc.

Houston, the “Justice for Trayvon” narrative has a serious problem.

1. Trayvon’s phone had texts on 3-round fight he won. Half brother asked on FaceBook when Martin could teach him how to fight.
2. photo from Trayvon’s phone shows hand on gun and texts about him trying to acquire gun


txantimedia | July 9, 2013 at 8:54 pm

Did I see West have an expression of exasperation on his face over the last objection? I think he’s getting tired of these useless objections extending the time it takes to make the proffer.

Or are they really not useless objections?

For all the spelling and grammar nazis, as per JDN, all typos are not to be corrected, b/c it is speculation that you know what the suspected offender meant!!! Free at last, free at last etc…

    creeper in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 10:29 pm

    Obvious typos will be given a pass. Misspellings and grammatical errors will be politely corrected.

    Further, corrections to my own errors are solicited and welcome. How will I learn if no one teaches me?

    Grammar Nazi

It’s only a proffer to see if this testimony will be allowed in front of jury. prosecution are just being dicks as judge just told them basically

Looks like St Trayvon wasn’t that much of one. He was a 17 yr old thug and thats why his mother booted him.

Buying and selling guns. He was just a misunderstood innocent child.

But wait!!!
Where is the testimony showing where Trayvon Martin was staying???
Did the little brother state where he lived?

The number one thing the defense needed to do IMO was hammer home the fact that this 17 year old football player had over a minute to get his butt 400 feet to safety and his house. Forget this video. Just show them a map of where Trayvon ran, where he was staying, where the confrontation took place and how long after George said, “He ran” did the fight start.

I haven’t heard any testimony or evidence addressing this crucial point yet!

Sure, they will say it in closing, but I want it in evidence and testimony that the jury will have with them in deliberations.

Am I missing something????

    txantimedia in reply to fogflyer. | July 9, 2013 at 9:25 pm

    Yes, it’s already in evidence. Rachel Jeantel testified that TM told her he was “right by his father’s house”. That sufficient evidence for the defense to point out in closing that since the fight took place at the T, TM had to have returned there after having arrived at the safety of his father’s house.

I still continue to worry over the all female composition of the jury.

I’m concerned that they will not resist the opportunity to exert ultimate control over a man they consider unsympathetic, b/c he’s a gun totin meanie who started the whole thing by harassing poor Trademark, the actual law be damned.

Somehow, in the minds of the vast majority of female commentators on TV, they fail to accept that, even if Zimm did ‘provoke’ Trademark by ‘following’ him, which is not illegal, it IS a CRIMINAL FELONY to respond with a vicious physical assault.

Even if every bigoted iota of what these hysterics believe is true, Trademark was still killed in the act of committing a felony assault.

At this point, the hysterics are not denying Trademark did the assault, but they are throwing out the law in favor of an absurd prejudice against Zimm b/c he supposedly wasn’t minding his own business enough to suit them.

MOM must address this mental construct directly in closing. He must not confine himself to the facts, but must confront the ugly potentialities that are rooted in the common female psyche.

He must instruct the jury as well as persuade it, all while keeping Nelson off his back.

And here’s how bad it can get: One young female on an HLN ‘jury’ said yes, it was Zimm screaming, but only b/c he was trying to frame a premeditated murder by playing the victim.

So, not only does this fool buy M2, she’s good for Murder in the First. They rest of the ‘jury’, with ONE exception (a rogue black female) thought it was Trademark screaming.

Somebody talk me down!

    Jazzizhep in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 9:17 pm

    i believe one woman has a CCW, and another let her license lapse

    styro1 in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 9:18 pm

    Do you think these people had no opinion before the trial or do think HLN might have stacked jury to get the opinions they were looking for for the “narrative”.

      bildung in reply to styro1. | July 9, 2013 at 9:23 pm

      Yes, I know these forums are rigged, but they don’t seem that far out of whack with a lot of what I encounter anecdotally.

      How about you?

    txantimedia in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 9:27 pm

    I still continue to worry over the all female composition of the jury.

    I’m concerned that they will not resist the opportunity to exert ultimate control over a man they consider unsympathetic, b/c he’s a gun totin meanie who started the whole thing by harassing poor Trademark, the actual law be damned.

    How is your concern relevant to the fact that the jurors are female? Do you honestly want to argue that women cannot think logically? Cannot follow the arguments and come to the right decision?

      MarkS in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 9:40 pm

      Yeah! I’ll make the argument that women are prone to let their emotions get in the way of reason and logic. An all female jury might find sympathy in another mother losing a son in a needless tragedy. After all if GZ had just stayed in his truck or listened to NEN operator and knocked it off another female wouldn’t have to suffer such a tragic loss. I say GZ at least gets Manslaughter as a “compromise” verdict or more than likely M2. I sincerely hope I’m wrong but I have my doubts.

        Why would the mothers on the jury necessarily think of Trayvon as their putative son, and not Georgie?

        I know that if I had a son, he’d look (and more importantly, behave) more like normal-dude Zimmerman than like gangsta-thug Trayvon. Georgie is some mother’s son as well, after all, and it’s not nice to see him (and his family) being put through hell like this.

      bildung in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 11:07 pm

      They elected Obama didn’t they?

        They elected Obama didn’t they?

        Who is “they”? White women in Florida, as the members of the jury are?

        No. No they did not elect Obama, actually. Obama did not win the non-black, non-hispanic female vote in Florida. The demographic of the this particular jury is not your “problem demographic”.

        It was more likely the petulant white male demographic who irrationally and illogically either stayed home and didn’t vote at all, or who voted for Johnson, who threw Florida to the Obamabots.

        Good thing there’re none of them bone-headed, irrational, illogical white males on the jury, hey? 😉

    Pauldd in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 9:41 pm

    “And here’s how bad it can get: One young female on an HLN ‘jury’ said yes, it was Zimm screaming, but only b/c he was trying to frame a premeditated murder by playing the victim.”

    That is why the lawyers get to choose the jury. Defense counsel are very experienced trial attorneys who have likely done hundreds of jury trials. Here they have worked a jury consultant. The whole idea is to screen out this type of idiot.

    The type of person who shows up on these hl1 juries are people with an agenda who would never make if on a real jury.

      I think some people don’t “get” that TV is entertainment, it’s not real life. The whole raison d’etre (or “raisin debt”, as I recently saw someone put it!) of TV is to sell viewers’ eyeballs to advertisers.

      It’s. Not. Real.

      bildung in reply to Pauldd. | July 9, 2013 at 11:14 pm

      That’s a good point, unless the entire pool from which they have to pull is tainted, which is my worry.

      I’d like a more detailed backstory on how we wound up with an all female jury; it seems to violate the basic principle of risk diversification.

    mom2ads in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 9:48 pm

    Oh stop… I am a single white woman and mom in Seminole County. I am the jury except I am a lawyer. The ONLY way they convict him? They are worried about the twitter and facebook morons finding out their names and hurting them or family. If they go on evidence (and they will), he’s free. Waaah for the parents… who cost the jury members how much of their tax money creating a drama and national spectacle for NO REASON? The obnoxious shutting down of Sanford by the race mongers Jackson and Sharpton et. al. will be remembered by the jury. It was despicable. Despicable. Remember. I live in Seminole. I am female, middle aged and caucasian. They think – mostly – as I think.

    annav in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    I’m a middle aged, white, liberal democrat woman. I’m a mom, pro gun control, and anti death penalty. While the death of TM is a senseless tragedy, based on the evidence, I firmly believe that GZ is guilty of no crime. If I were on the jury, I’d vote to acquit.

    creeper in reply to bildung. | July 9, 2013 at 10:39 pm

    Give it a rest.

    AmberK in reply to bildung. | July 10, 2013 at 4:45 am

    Ok… I’ll bite.

    “I still continue to worry over the all female composition of the jury.”

    The fact that you are worried because of an all female jury says way more about you than it could possibly cause issue in this trial.

    Would you have the same worry if it was all male? Of course you wouldn’t, because you assume men are infallible, I’m guessing because you are one, and you assume that DESPITE the fact that it is a proven fact throughout history that some men (I will not be so silly as to say ALL like you did) are quite easily bought for a few dollars or a sexual favor.

    “I’m concerned that they will not resist the opportunity to exert ultimate control over a man…”

    As a woman, this leads me to a suspicion of exactly why you have this worry. Just so you know, not all of us are the manipulative ball busters you seem to be hanging out with.

    “…they consider unsympathetic, b/c he’s a gun totin meanie who started the whole thing by harassing poor Trademark, the actual law be damned.”

    There are so many assumptions in this statement that you have no basis for that the entire statement is beyond absurd. IF they consider him unsympathetic, and IF they think he is unsympathetic because of the gun, and IF they think he was harassing TM, and IF they are willing to ignore the laws that may someday have to protect them…

    I’m a woman (like all of the jurors)
    I am white (like 5 of the jurors)
    I’m a mother (not sure how many of them are, didn’t look that deep)
    AND I HATE guns (unlike 4 of the jurors that either currently own a gun, previously owned a gun, or have family members that own guns which makes it very unlikely that they hate guns)
    And, oops, I find him very sympathetic, I FIRMLY believe in his constitutional right to bear arms and the Florida state right to carry a concealed weapon, I absolutely abhor that this trial even got started, and I am thoroughly embarrassed as an american that this tragic joke of a trial is now going to forever be part of our legal system.

    “Somehow, in the minds of the vast majority of female commentators on TV…”

    Ohhhh… now it alllllll makes sense.

    Are you really telling me that you ACTUALLY BELIEVE that because the liberal men in charge of the liberal media hired liberal women to push the liberal agenda… ALL women are out to get poor hardworking men that believe in the constitution?


    Well, I think we can just dismiss the rest of your statement from here, because if THAT is your reason to be so worried, you have gone far beyond tin foil hat into the land of ludicrous stupidity, and I am of the personal belief that you can not be helped.

Mantei reveals himself as an arse one more time.

He is the one to introduce the suspicion of “mass deletion” of data from the phone.

He is so terrified of this testimony that right now he doesn’t even know what’s better for his case and wat’s not.

Are they STILL arguing?

think we’ll get a post-post wrap up from Branca? 🙂

I dont understand why its important to the state that the gun muzzle was press against trademark’s chest. I do understand how it helps the defense that it wasnt – the difference in gunpower residue on the shirt and on the skin proves trademark was leaning over Zimmerman and gravity (or weight of drink) pulled material away from the skin.

But what difference does it make from a self defense point of view whether Zimmerman shot him from a short distance or pressed it against his attacker’s chest? Why does the prosecutor keep pressing this point? Is there supposedly more malious to shoot someone with the gun contacting them?

If I were being attacked in close like he was, i would press the gun against my attacker’s body if for no other reason to make certain i hit my target.

    txantimedia in reply to rokiloki. | July 9, 2013 at 9:32 pm

    I’m not saying it’s logical, but the prosecution’s theory seems to be that he pressed the gun directly over TM’s heart and fired in a deliberate attempt to kill him – which, at least in their minds, supports their theory that he acted with a depraved mind.

    Remember, the prosecution has already argued that simply shooting someone in the heart demonstrates a depraved mind. Under the law it’s a ridiculous argument, but so has almost everything else the prosecution argued been.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to txantimedia. | July 10, 2013 at 4:11 am

      The prosecution has alluded the TM might even have been backing off and retreating from the fight, but that GZ shot him in cold blood.

    Mac45 in reply to rokiloki. | July 9, 2013 at 9:36 pm

    In a logical world, the greater the distance from which the shot was fired, the greater the likelihood that the shot was not taken as a last ditch attempt st self defense. So, if the wound were a contact wound or one fired from mere inches, it would increase the likelihood that GZ was in a life and death struggle when he fired the shot.

    But, in the trans-looking glass world of the prosecution, the fact that the muzzle was in contact with the body when the shot was fired somehow evinces a depraved mind and a man who shot his attacker for no apparent reason. In other words, it is designed to elicit an emotional response from uninformed people which is at odds with logic.

    In reality, any tattooing or stippling simply strengthens the defense contention that GZ was in a fight, from which he could not escape.

    WMMC in reply to rokiloki. | July 9, 2013 at 9:39 pm

    “I dont understand why its important to the state that the gun muzzle was press against trademark’s chest.”

    My take is they want to discredit GZ, who stated that he ‘thought he missed Trayvon when he shot’. If they could prove that the muzzle was pressed firmly against Trayvon’s chest how could GZ have possibly thought he missed. Just more grasping at straws by the prosecution, but that’s what you resort to when you don’t have a case.

prosecution theory 7.2: GZ walked up and shot TM in the chest (with both standing), and GZ was then attacked by band of rogue trees

    Jazzizhep in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 9:27 pm

    should have been a reply to rokiloki

    styro1 in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 9:31 pm

    Must be the trees from The Wizard of Oz. I think the trees also threw apples growing from them.

    Nohbody in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 10, 2013 at 2:50 am

    “attacked by band of rogue trees”

    So the prosecution was taken from the dwarven lands of “Order of the Stick”, where paper cuts are referred to as “treevenge”?

    (Stick figure webcomic that parodies D&D, for the unaware. Irregular schedule due to RL limitations on the author, but funny even for those not familiar with D&D rules. Available here: )

Jeezus! They’ve been at it for 13 hours straight. How are they going to show up tomorrow at 8 a.m. and speak and think even semi-coherently?

    Jim in reply to wyntre. | July 9, 2013 at 9:49 pm

    Wyntre, that is what trial lawyers do, and that is why they earn their fees. I quit in 2011 after being lead trial counsel in more than 250 cases since 1966. After two by passes,15 stents, an internal defibrillatror implant, trying cases finally got to me physically to the point that I couldn’t do it any more. It is a tough business.

      wyntre in reply to Jim. | July 9, 2013 at 10:33 pm

      It seems absolutely grueling. I caught the tail-end of tonight’s marathon and West was arguing just that, about how the defense can’t be ready with their case tomorrow because of the late hour and not having enough time to get witnesses lines up, etc. The judge didn’t give a flying fig and just walked out while MOM tried to get West to shut up.

      It does not seem fair to force the defense to continue tomorrow at 8 a.m.

    creeper in reply to wyntre. | July 9, 2013 at 10:47 pm

    Adrenalin is a wonderful thing.

Forgetting all the other reversible errors by the judge I would think keeping defense lawyers way after normal court hours where they might make key mistakes b/c of being tired could be included in an appeal.

    txantimedia in reply to styro1. | July 9, 2013 at 9:38 pm

    If she had accepted the defense’s motions for continuance, she wouldn’t be sitting here at almost 10PM Florida time hearing the arguments for this proffer.

      txantimedia in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 9:39 pm

      IOW, it’s her own damn fault. And that fault is reversible on appeal.

        styro1 in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 9:42 pm

        Absolutely and if GZ is convicted, the appeals court may just throw the case out on appeal never mind ordering a new trial on the basis that there is no evidence.

          swimmerbhs in reply to styro1. | July 9, 2013 at 11:53 pm

          you guys have noticed lately she has been nicer to the defense right? I wonder if this has anything to do with DCA. They said they would keep an eye on her during the trial, i wonder if they wrote her a letter with how many errors she has made that would cause reversible errors.

    Jazzizhep in reply to styro1. | July 9, 2013 at 9:46 pm

    don’t be too concerned about the lawyers, i have a feeling they are used to long hours…at least trial lawyers

      wyntre in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 10:38 pm

      I have a renewed respect for some in the legal profession after watching this case unfold in real time. Honestly, I can’t imagine being intellectually fresh in such a pressure cooker atmosphere on just a few hours sleep.

      Guess that’s why I never went to law school.

txantimedia | July 9, 2013 at 9:37 pm

I wonder if John Good regrets that he didn’t push TM off of GZ?

    Jazzizhep in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 9:54 pm

    I don’t know how I would feel. I have tendency to step in (past victim of violent crime), but in that situation I don’t know. Not being able to see what was going actually going on would be tough. I don’t think I would regret it too much. However, knowing what I know now, if GZ would have been seriously injured I would feel regret.

    healthguyfsu in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 11:57 pm

    I sure wouldn’t.

    What if he had decided to push him right at the moment Zimmerman drew the weapon?

    He could have easily ended up shot in the chest himself depending on how far he extended himself in the effort to remove the rabid fight clubber.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to healthguyfsu. | July 10, 2013 at 4:17 am

      I would have come up behind Trayvon and hit him in the hoodie with a large tree branch (carved into a baseball bat).

Judge Nelson: “Motion Denied I know better than the writers of the Constitutions of both Florida and the United States.”

I am torn on the fighting evidence coming in. In this case I think I would like to see it, but in rape cases when the defense tries to portray the victim as slutty, I do not want to see it get in. I can’t have it both ways. I realize GZ is also a victim, but I have no idea where to draw the line.

    txantimedia in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 9:50 pm

    Interesting point.

    I think, in this case, it would be analogous to a rape case where testimony is adduced that the victim accepted money for sex and promised to deliver but then cried rape because she didn’t like the way the guy performed or felt like she had to do more than she had been paid for.

    Surely that should be introduced in front of the jury?

    ProfessionalSpectator in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 10:26 pm

    We have rape shield laws for that specific reason. Evidence of a victim’s past sexual history is typically NOT allowed in. Evidence of a homicide victim’s predisposition to violence, specifically in a self-defense case, is almost ALWAY allowed in.

    Michiguy in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 11:25 pm

    GZ is also a victim
    GZ is not also a victim, he is the victim of an assault that could killed him or left him with permanent brain damage. TM was not a victim, he was an aggressor who got shot by someone legally defending himself by trying to stop the potentially lethal assault. That TM died was an unfortunate outcome of GZ’s justified actions, but TM is not a victim, he’s a guy who got dead in the course of committing a criminal act.

txantimedia | July 9, 2013 at 9:45 pm

Is a jury not allowed to make logical inferences from evidence? Or is the prosecution simply stupid on its face?

Bernie De La Rionda “So you shoot live animals?”

I guess that was meant to sway any animal loving juror.

Pretty sad.

Thats to bad West GZ is not allowed to have a fair trial.

This judge id f-ing thick

    edbarbar in reply to styro1. | July 10, 2013 at 3:06 am

    The judge seems to be changing her disposition as the trial goes along. At first I thought it might have been that as the trial changed from prosecution to defense, that she gave increasing latitude to the defense, until I saw this utter piece of bullshit from her.

    She is better than the medical examiner Rao, but not by much.

    O’Mara has become a hero of mine, as have several of the defense witnesses.

txantimedia | July 9, 2013 at 9:58 pm

Wow! The judge just gave the defense the big finger. You don’t have time? Tough titties, boys. Suck it up.

What about the damn defendant? Does he not have any rights?


It’s about time they got pissed. The judge has been blowing them off from the beginning.

Carol Herman | July 9, 2013 at 9:59 pm

I figured Nelson out! As the end of the court day occurred when she released the jury. Nelson then went into overdrive! Her purpose? TO FORCE O’MARA & WEST to stay in the courtroom … for hours and hours … until the court lights went out. Making the whole thing surreal. Until someone found the over-ride light switch. And, she kept on going making O’Mara, first. Then West. Present their case “as if we were in a real courtroom.” But she was exposing each of them to PUT ON A SHOW. Calling in Connor. The man who deciphered Trayvon’s cell phone … Where “in the courtroom” details were provided of Trayvon smoking … where from his mouth, white smoke circles up into his right nostril.


People don’t have to watch the show trial in nelson’s courtroom; where her behaviors today not only bordered on the sadistic … SHE WENT OVER THE LINE!

Just like some screwy professors … who give many of their students sleepless nights. As they do crazy assignments. And, then this material doesn’t even show up on their finals.

9 PM Floriduh time, I cut for dinner. And, on the way out the door it dawned on me. (If I was Columbo, I would have swerved, and returned to my computer) … to input “just one more thing.”

Nelson found a way today to push O’Mara and West off their successful defense. And, to curtail any of the news that would be derived from Dr. Vincent DiMaoi fabulous testimony.

Nelson can’t stop Drudge! And, she won’t prevent a host of writers from writing books about this miscarriage of justice, either. That’s why it says the fakers can travel around the world, while TRUTH is still putting its boots on, as it awakens groggily out of bed.

There’s smiles and a positive attitude in the defense team in spite of the judge’s refusal as they leave the room.

Is it because they managed to advanced the idea of constitutional violations against the defendant?

Can the experts explain?

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Exiliado. | July 10, 2013 at 12:02 am

    IANAL so I’m certainly no expert. But the same question entered my mind and here’s what I think may be up: The defense just put the crowning glory on their appeal if she disallows the texts and photos. It’s a win-win for them, because if she relents and lets it in, they win. If she doesn’t, and there’s a conviction, they win on appeal or through some other maneuver (writs?). The constitutional issue is squarely before the court now, particularly as it relates to self-defense as a defense specifically allowed by FL law. That is the heart of the defense’s case.

      I’m a software engineer, and at this point, I would suppose IANAL doesn’t matter too much. You not only have to be a lawyer, but the right kind of lawyer. Same thing in software engineering. Or about anything else. Being a gourmet French Chef does not make you an expert on Kidney Pies.

      Unless, of course, you are a Lesbian Jewish Judge.

if she decides that they cannot introduce the phone records b/c of validation, and it is found that the State only submitted partial records, MY OH MY

txantimedia | July 9, 2013 at 10:04 pm

I would not be at all surprised to hear the defense inform the judge tomorrow that they will not complete their defense until Friday. That gives them time to appeal her ruling at an emergency hearing to get the text message evidence in. Plus it makes Nelson pay for her obstreperous actions toward the defense.

OK, you want to play that game? Fine. We’ll go two more days, just to piss you off.

    fogflyer in reply to txantimedia. | July 10, 2013 at 1:10 am

    Emergency hearing!?!?!?
    Can they really do that? Sounds like a plan!

    Matt in FL in reply to txantimedia. | July 10, 2013 at 1:16 am

    @txantimedia: You think they can manage to string it out that long? Maybe by adding back in some of the witnesses they’d struck from their list, just as a timesuck?

also, does the State have some responsibility in making the validation objection in a timely manner…they objected to the fighting coming out during opening, and it was upheld, but now can they make a separate, and different, objection

The state has been slow with discovery since charges against GZ were brought last year. They only received the bin file from the phone in May a month before the trial started.

no post-post trial wrap up from branca…he just realized proffer was tonight..DOH! we’ll let it slide, this time…but he missed some fireworks, and i missed his tweets

The NAACP annual convention starts in Orlando on Friday. That may be why MOM wants to finish case by then. He’d end up with a thousand Chump’s, I mean Crump’s, down here.

Carol Herman | July 9, 2013 at 10:20 pm

Nelson’s like the Queen in Alice & Wonderland: “OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!” And, all the lines that go with it.

Ahead, if someone does a parody of this trial … I am sure Nelson will be portrayed as the Red Queen. O’Mara? As the Cheshire Cat.

    Benny in reply to Carol Herman. | July 9, 2013 at 11:05 pm

    I don’t know, judges are like a force of nature; they do what they do and you might as well complain about the weather. Mom and West are the superior talent and as much as they complain they will do better on no sleep than the Scheme Team. The ST has to be ready for what they are going to get grounded and pounded with tomorrow and if Bernie’s cross of Di Maio is any indication they will be stretched to the limit tomorrow. Even the shooting the dog part; it seemed good at the moment but is cheap and manipulative in the end.

    I am pretty confident that this is the jury Mom wanted. He is a grinder, artful to be sure, but he has patience. He has the air of somebody who does not want to be anywhere else. I hate to stereotype but a woman can always outlast a man (what did I just say). I think Mom has a good idea of who is on the jury and has a rhythm that takes them with him. Bernie is just that nasty uncle who you tried to stay away from.

      That’s funny, just at lunch today a friend referred to BDLR as “that skeevy Uncle Bernie”.

      xfactor in reply to Benny. | July 10, 2013 at 12:35 am

      CNN anchor Ashleigh Banfield was gushing over how great of a prosecutor BDLR is. She literally said this 3-4 times in a 15 minute span. One of the analyst guest said she sounded like the president of his fan club, which caused her to say in embarrassment “well, O’Mara is good too.” It was pathetic.

Carol Herman | July 9, 2013 at 11:22 pm

Our opinions aren’t in evidence. Yet, I think Tracy Martin smelled money almost immediately. I don’t think Sibryna was thrilled with having Trayvon bounced into her home. Something that came about because the step mom Alicia Martin, was both the reason Tracy got to “wife #2’s house.” And, because Tracy was divorced from Wife #2, the “problem” of caring for the 14 year old Trayvon became a topic between two disinterested parents.

I don’t know where I read it, but I did read (somewhere) that Tracy Martin was a member of Crips. (I thought an LA gang, who fought da’ BLOODS.) But with drugs becoming a big time industry, it’s possible Tracy had introduced Trayvon “to da’ life.” Where Trayvon could sell contraband and not go to prison. Because he was on 10, or 12, or 14.

It wouldn’t surprise me that Trayvon used to give his dad money. Just like this shiftless man found homes with women he “serviced.” Love ain’t got anything to do with our story.

The jury has seeen the differences between Trayvon’s mom, without learning where she had been from the time Trayvon was 3, and Tracy remarried.

For an update, you learn that Brandy Green lives in a Sanford condo. And, this woman has no concerns at all about leaving her son, Chad, ALONE, all night, so she could go out and party it up with Tracy. Nobody seemed concerned
that Trayvon never did arrive at this place.

When did it become “old-fashioned” to give teenagers CURFEWS? Plus, today’s teenagers have cell phones. So? Wouldn’t most kids have to call home if they new their parents were waiting up for them?

If anyone missed it, prompted by a fellow Legal Insurrection fan:

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY: I’ve instituted a Legal Insurrection coupon, equivalent to the previously mentioned NRA/IDPA coupon–$5 off, and free shipping.

Coupon code is: LOSD2-LI (but it’s not cap sensitive)

Sorry for not thinking of it sooner.

–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

legacyrepublican | July 10, 2013 at 12:57 am

Sniff, sniff … Mongo only pawn in game of self-defense.

Wow. I just got a chance to catch the last hour of court, as I had to leave the house at 9 p.m. That display by the judge was the most astonishing thing in this case, which has been filled with astonishing things. Just wow.

I appreciate Don Wests frustration at this point.However,he ,just as all of us need to keep perspective.If admitted the text messages would only just shake up the rubble that is the state’s case.

Question on a legal point: If Donnelly’s testimony is struck, why wouldn’t the testimony of Martin’s parents, including the mother’s identification of the voice heard on the 911 tape as her son’s, be struck on the very same grounds? Before they testified, didn’t the parents sit in audience in the courtroom during the trial and hear the testimony of earlier witnesses?

[…] Noted Forensic Pathologist Says Zimmerman Story “Consistent” with Evidence, As Defense Case Near… […]