Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Zimmerman Trial Day 11: Live Video, Analysis of Defense’s Case & Witnesses

Zimmerman Trial Day 11: Live Video, Analysis of Defense’s Case & Witnesses

Today we will again be covering the Zimmerman Trial live, all day, with streaming video. Continuing commentary will be posted in the Twitter feed of selected contributors below the first video feed, and breaking news will be added at the bottom of this post.

Live Stream Video

WITH COMMENTARY FROM CHANNEL 9 IN SANFORD

[For live-stream video without commentary, see NBC live feed at bottom of this post.]

Twitter Feed:

(My tweets can be identified as coming from @lawselfdefense, or @lawselfdefense2 if I’m in Twitmo–follow both!.)



Live Stream Video Alternative

LIVE-STREAM WITHOUT COMMENTARY FROM NBC

Tuesday, July 9 Commentary

During the lunch recess, or immediately thereafter, we will TRY topost a mid-day update. We’ll then follow up with the usual detailed end-of-day wrap up, including video and embedded Tweets, at the usual time in the evening.

Our end-of-day wrap-up and analysis of yesterday focused on the collapse of the State’s “scream” theory of the case, which imploded with the disclosure that Tracey Martin had initially denied that the screaming on the Lauer 911 recording was that of his son, Trayvon Martin. It also noted that the Court had decided to allow Trayvon Martin’s toxicology report to be allowed into evdience. Also, of course, it contains video of all the other testimony and hearings caught on camera throughout the day. That can be found here:

Implosion: Police Testify Trayvon’s Father Originally Denied Son Was Screaming

This past weekend I posted up an analytical piece of Mark O’Mara’s request for a judgment of acquittal. O’Mara’s motion was well-reasoned and supported by Florida’s case law. It was, of course, doomed to peremptory denial by Judge Nelson. In that piece I’ve linked almost all of the case citations made by O’Mara to full-length copies of the decisions, so you can see the sources for yourselves, if you like (most of the decisions are gratifyingly brief). You can see that here:

Why Zimmerman’s Motion for Acquittal Should Have Been Granted

Last Thursday, July 4, I had posted up a review of the trial to date, with some prognostication of how things may role out in the coming days. To take a look at that, click here:

Zimmerman Trial Review– How We Got Here, And Where We’re Going

For all of our prior coverage on day-to-day events in court, as covered here at Legal Insurrection, click here:

ARCHIVE: Zimmerman Trial LIVE coverage all day, every day

For all of our prior coverage on issues specific to the Law of Self Defense as covered at my own blog, click here:

Law of Self Defense Blog: Zimmerman Trial

(NOTE: If you do wander over to the LOSD blog, be sure to come back to Legal Insurrection to comment, as nearly all my time is spent here for the duration of the trial.)


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 www.lawofselfdefense.com.)

Note also that “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition” is also available at Amazon.com.  They set their own price, and it can vary 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.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments


MSNBC is going all out on the racial injustice angle! They haven’t mentioned the KKK yet, but it can only be a matter of minutes away.

This is journalistic malpractice of the most invidious kind. This is a televised lynching and the FBI and DoJ (Holder-ing my breath) need to investigate. As the left loves to bleat, freedom of speech does not include hate speech.

Screw these racists bastards! (I apologize for my language)

    Fabi in reply to Fabi. | July 9, 2013 at 5:29 pm

    Just had three legal experts on MSNBC and a completely fatuous AA former prosecutor was simply orgasmic at how the defense’s forensic expert was dissected by BdlR.

    Then a former judge replied and simply tinkled in this guy’s Cherrios. Said the prosecutor didn’t even have a single theory of what happened – were trying to throw things against the wall to see what stuck. Was the prosecutor’s job – not the defense’s – to eliminate reasonable doubt, not introduce it! lol

      PackerBronco in reply to Fabi. | July 9, 2013 at 5:39 pm

      No kidding! Watching that Cross with the questions about whether GZ hurt himself on a tree, all I could think of was: “does this moron think that GZ has to prove his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt?”

Mantai (SIC) looks terrible! Facial expressions. Slow, unknowing questions. His suit sucks; poor quality and ill tailored. But worst of all he is a dead ringer for the first defense attorney in My Cousin Vinny!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYCvn7pqEHI

    Fabi in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 5:19 pm

    His suit sucks; poor quality and ill tailored.

    Maybe he has the same wardrobe/styling consultant as the judge!

    GZ should give hime some of his leftover Jos. A. Banks duds when this fiasco is terminated.

    franker01 in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Well, someone said they kept the room chilly because of JDN’s flashes. Maybe Mantei is just cold and likes to keep all the buttons on his suit tightly buttoned?

    franker01 in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 6:11 pm

    Looks like Mantei may have gone back to playing Candy Crush on his Iphone.

    robbi in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 7:19 pm

    He will have tone of wrinkles around his mouth from pouting so much.

Uncle Samuel | July 9, 2013 at 5:06 pm

The animation was made before the trial – so it could not possibly be comprised only of trial evidence, testimony.

    Jazzizhep in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    don’t forget depos, it is supposed to show to what a witness is going to testify….don’t forget “never ask a question in which you don’t know the answer”

      MAPTX in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 5:17 pm

      so are you guys thinking Nelson will allow it?

        DriveBy in reply to MAPTX. | July 9, 2013 at 5:20 pm

        I think that Nelson was impressed by the video when she watched it this morning. I think that Mantai (SIC) is badgering the witness. 1+1= Nelson will not allow the video!

        Maybe O’Mara will release it after court, just for fun.

      pathfindersgt in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 5:18 pm

      and for which you don’t have AT LEAST two follow-up questions.

      someone on the prosecution might do well to read a little more Sun Tzu….

KrazyCrackaEsq | July 9, 2013 at 5:18 pm

I’d like to know if this is normal for Mantei. I mean does he want jurors to hate him? (I know they aren’t present right now) He must get a lot of plea deals.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to KrazyCrackaEsq. | July 9, 2013 at 5:20 pm

    Jurors are not in the room, so he can be as asinine as he wants.

      KrazyCrackaEsq in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 5:27 pm

      Ya, but he acts like an ass in front of the jury. Maybe not as bad as right now, but dang. Someone posted that this somewhere and it cracked me up – “If he can’t accept his baldness, how can we accept his arguments?”

Wow, I think Mantei wants to show he’s no little guy and can be just as much of a douchebag as BDLR.

Does the animation in any way suggest that Lauer and Good knew what each other was doing?

I don’t get the point of mantei’s questions. He is trying to obfuscate.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Exiliado. | July 9, 2013 at 5:29 pm

    Mantei is trying to discredit the process, the technology and the technician…SO he can bolster and continue to promulgate and hyper-dramatize the Crump/Julison false fictional narrative.

Carol Herman | July 9, 2013 at 5:23 pm

Well, with the jury out of the room, all you got for the decision ahead is little judge debbi half-nelson. And, it seems over the past few days she’s seen her career go under the microscope.

If the animation ain’t allowed, it will become a You Tube sensation in the years ahead.

Isn’t there a timeline of all the events, based on the timestamps of the telephone calls?

I actually understand the technical side of the animation data collection. I work with data collection electronics like this.

Mantei is being a jackwagon, and Nelson is letting him ….. be a jackwagon to this guy. He is being completely snotty to this guy. For no reason. All this guy did was build the animation based on data given him.

This video animation must be devastating to the prosecution.

    Dr Stiffy in reply to Bryan24. | July 9, 2013 at 5:35 pm

    Yeah, nice guy getting beat up and his work insulted for no reason. Mantei looked liked a real jerk for attacking his credentials. This guy is being called by the defense. Isn’t his job to make the defense look good?

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Dr Stiffy. | July 9, 2013 at 6:31 pm

      The animation guy seems like a nice guy doing the job he was hired to do. Unfortunately, he’s not very articulate.

      But Matei is, in the big picture, arguing against his own case. If the animation guy can’t, according to Matei accurately depict who was where and who did what, then how can he, as the prosecutor, have any theory of the case. Matei has been telling the animation guy “you don’t know who was where when because your animation isn’t based on testimony”. But Matei doesn’t know exactly, either. The animation guy has been updating and modifying his video according to the testimony coming from the defense attorneys. Ummmm, Matei, this IS the defense’s case being presented.

Humphreys Executor | July 9, 2013 at 5:32 pm

My two cents worth: I just don’t see how the video comes in as for anything other than demonstrative purposes. Otherwise, you’d have to have each witness, including Zimmerman1?, come into court, look at the vid, and testify, “yes that’s what I saw.” Its more of an authentication issue.

    Wolverine in reply to Humphreys Executor. | July 9, 2013 at 5:54 pm

    I agree. The video would necessarily need to pick and choose which witness’s testimony to animate (Sudyka vs. Good/forensics, etc.). That is the job of the jury to decide.

    Should be fine to use as a demonstration during closing arguments to illustrate the defense’s theory. Annotations reflecting the various witness statements and the time line would be powerful in putting it all together for the jury.

Please pray that the judge lets this video come in so that this poor guy, and others like him, will not be subjected to this BS again in the future! I can’t take it anymore!!!!!

This animator may have produced a great video, but he certainly would be a lousy witness on cross examination. The judge will do the defense a favor if she disallows it.

    Exiliado in reply to neils. | July 9, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    That’s what I have been thinking.
    He seems nervous and intimidated by mantei.

      Matt in FL in reply to Exiliado. | July 9, 2013 at 5:43 pm

      He has seemed nervous to me the whole time he’s been talking. Even this morning while he was answering MOM’s questions, I thought I heard his voice quavering a bit. I finally decided it was just how his voice is, but I could be wrong.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Exiliado. | July 9, 2013 at 5:51 pm

      Shumaker has been seriously ill and has just recovered enough to do this animation job.

        Matt in FL in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 5:52 pm

        That would certainly be a good excuse for a little quaver in his voice.

          KrazyCrackaEsq in reply to Matt in FL. | July 9, 2013 at 6:04 pm

          I mean that and the fact he is testifying in a criminal trial that is being broadcast across the country where a man could end up going to jail for up to 30 years and that man has hired you to help him in his defense. I mean why the hell is this guy nervous?

    Dr Stiffy in reply to neils. | July 9, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    I feel horrible for this guy. He’s doing his job and trying to make a living. Mantei is just being a total assclown.

    @Exiliado This is not a confrontational kind of person. He is just trying to be honest and do his job.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to neils. | July 9, 2013 at 6:34 pm

    The fact that Matei is arguing there’s no way to know who was where doing what while so-and-so was talking or doing such-and-such undermines the requirement that the State present what happened because that is the crux of their claim that TM was shot in cold blood, not as a matter of self-defense.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to JackRussellTerrierist. | July 9, 2013 at 6:38 pm

      I meant to add that Mantei may have walked into a trap set by MOM.

      Perhaps MOM can read back some of Mantei’s questions to the animaton guy about how could he possibly know who was where when, etc..

      I think Mantei doesn’t want the animation for several reasons, but most of all to push the defense into having GZ testify about who was where, when, etc..

You know, this animator has hit on something I’ve been wondering about too. There have been several times in this trial where a question has started with “Are you aware that (X) happened or (Y) testified to such-and-such in this courtroom during the course of this trial?” I’ve sort of wanted to hear someone say “How the hell could I know that when you’ve got us all sequestered?”

This guy needs to grow some chops if he expects to keep making payments on that fancy equipment, though. Mantei’s being a twerp but he shouldn’t be THAT hard to put into his place. Too bad Schumaker hasn’t been allowed to watch all of the trial presentation so far- I’d love for him to come back with something like “Look, bub, my video is no more based on a figment of the imagination than the pixie dust YOU’ve been trying to sell for the past few weeks.”

    Humphreys Executor in reply to Hodor. | July 9, 2013 at 5:44 pm

    Where I’m from, experts can sit in at trial an base their opinions on evidence admitted at the trial. Why was he sequestered if he wasn’t a fact witness?

      Wolverine in reply to Humphreys Executor. | July 9, 2013 at 6:15 pm

      Having the expert witnesses present during the presentation of the evidence they are basing their expert opinions on makes sense to me. That is kinda the whole point in having expert witnesses, to aid in the technical interpretation of the evidence so the jury can better understand what was presented.

The defense should withdraw its request to admit the animation. (Tomorrow morning.)

Mansizedtarget | July 9, 2013 at 5:42 pm

I have to say, I’m pro-defense, but this animation evidence sounds like bullshit that can easily eclipse actual evidence and should probably not be admitted under Daubert, Frye, or almost any other standard. This kind of evidence is useful when you’re reconstructing an accident or showing bullet trajectory, but here it seems kind of fanciful.

Gremlin1974 | July 9, 2013 at 5:43 pm

Ok, I think trying to get his animation is just a waste of time. The State basically made Zimmerman’s case for him, this is especially evidenced by how pissed Angela Corey looks. The animation just isn’t necessary anymore, IMHO. Also, the guy who is testifying for the video is so obviously not prepared. Nix the animation and move on.

    stella dallas in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 9, 2013 at 8:31 pm

    Do you really feel “The State basically made Zimmerman’s case for him”? At this point I have no idea what the state’s case is. MOM and West made the defense case. And they did a great job.

I’m starting to wonder if Mantei’s going to question him on every single data point until the defense just gets sick of it and withdraws the animation.

I thought just now, as I was typing this, that Nelson was going to step in and put a stop to this stupidity, but she just wanted the animation up on the video screen. 😐

I have no idea what the legal standard is in FL for admissibility of reconstruction evidence. Can anyone provide a cite or other information on that subject?

    Aridog in reply to Jim. | July 9, 2013 at 6:58 pm

    “…reconstructed evidence…” is an oxymoron is there ever was one. I do not understand how is is allowed for either side of any case. You have a shred of testimony layered over by a slathering of subjective analysis…and we call THAT “evidence?”

    I do not understand why the defense thinks it needs to include the animation …. good Lord, they’ve made their case and in my mind the prosecution has nothing, has proven nothing, and barely stays in the game with conjecture. In the future the name “Mantei” will be the equivalent of “conjecture”…especially if you grin like an idiot and act dismissive.

    Agggghhh!

Anybody else want to give Mantei an atomic wedgie?

Now is the time for a demonstration of “ground and pound.”

Humphreys Executor | July 9, 2013 at 5:59 pm

I don’t get it. If you wanted to put a photo of the crime scene into evidence, you wouldn’t bring in a camera expert. You’d bring in a witness to testify, “yes, that photo accurately depicts the crime scene on the day of the crime.”

Well, if this recreation is not allowed, NO recreation should ever be allowed.

    Aridog in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    As I said earlier…”recreation” = “imagination” more or less, not “evidence.” Should never be allowed and if allowed here may burn the defense unintentionally…an impartial jury sees a “cartoon” not “evidence.” I really like O’Mara and West, and the defense case they’ve made, but this folly baffles me.

Carol Herman | July 9, 2013 at 6:05 pm

Oh, the shell casing!

Finally, the one bullet that hit JFK, killing him in November 1963, has “landed.” In Florida. From? Who knows where?

Why didn’t the State have it’s own expert who could have filed their version? And, of course. Taking into account how long the signle bullet theory has been circling round and round.

If this trial was actually about finding the truth, and making sure justice is done, I don’t see why an animated reconstruction should not be allowed.

All that would be needed to do is ensure that everything that’s in the animation is in line with the testimonies of the witnesses and the reports of the scene experts.

Both sides would have to watch the video, raise their concerns, have the expert adjust, and then let the jury watch it.

However, we all know this is not about justice and definitely not about the truth. Hence, we need to ask ourselves:

Which party would benefit from not having the jurors “see” all the events/evidence put together in a recreation?

Makes me think…. and I find the answer scary.

What if Chantal turns into a Cat 4 hurricane bearing down on Central Florida? Can the judge still hold the jurors? Can you imagine what happens if there is substantial damage to the area (like from Charlie in 2004 or 2005)

    KrazyCrackaEsq in reply to MAPTX. | July 9, 2013 at 6:23 pm

    Her name was Jeantel and has it even been confirmed that the defense will call her back to the stand.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to MAPTX. | July 9, 2013 at 6:28 pm

    They are inland and weather tropical doesn’t bother Floridians a whole lot except on the coast.

      MKReagan in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 7:06 pm

      Hurricane Charlie in 2004 crossed the state from the gulf coast thru Orlando to Daytona where it became Cat 1, turned north, and went up the Atlantic coast thru the town I live in. Anything is possible.

        Frances and Jeanne went inland that year as well, crossing from east to west. They don’t all just track neatly along the coast like the very early (4-6 days out) “cones” usually suggest they should.

      MAPTX in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 11:02 pm

      The house I grew up in, my dad’s house and the Inlaws all lost power for days in Charlie……while inland damage is rare it happens and what better time to happen again than now LOL

The prosecution is lucky their witnesses didn’t have to go through this.

MOM is fed up with the constant objections. I don’t blame him. The jury isn’t present. Why the histrionics? Ask the questions and get the ruling.

Uncle Samuel | July 9, 2013 at 6:30 pm

I’m concerned about that 40 feet – how did the fight get from the sidewalk T to the place where Good saw them and TM was shot?

    Forty feet is about twelve paces. Fights are not static events. I see your point, but don’t think it will be an issue due to the dynamics of a scuffle.

I really like O’Mara, but he is asking this guy to change the recreation tonight because of input from the judge, referencing her notes, and she is unsure of what the hell she is asking. FloriDUH! Again…

    Aridog in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 7:09 pm

    Yep. More subjective nonsense in a non-evidential piece of crap cartoon. Now the Judge gets to input opinion in to the animation? Jesus H C on a crack trip. It can only hurt the defense.

I think what Mr. Shumaker is doing will probably one day become standard. He could be kinda pioneering a new industry within the courts and legal system.

There is a big difference between an analysis of isolated pieces of evidence and an analysis of the whole process or event where you can “see” exactly where each piece fits and how al the pieces interact with each other.

    Aridog in reply to Exiliado. | July 9, 2013 at 7:11 pm

    Yes, by gosh…it will be just perfect for our show trials of our future. Now we assume a jury can’t piece together a scenario, so we go all Walt Disney on them and do it for them?

At this point it looks like both the Judge and the Prosecution wants a mistrial!!!!

so does the animator need to put in the anthropomorphic “attacking” trees and branches?

Mantei is a creepy ass cracker but I think better of the judge as time goes by. She is a worker, I’ll give her that. She keeps moving things along and I appreciate her concern for the jury. Yeah it is about GZ’s life, I get that, but it is all on them in the end and they will likely do a better job if this does not grind on and on. If they do a good job GZ goes home a free man.

Where should George move? I say East Tennessee.

Uh oh!!!
O’Mara just got busted for meeting with Good while he was still under sequestration!
I hope this isn’t a game changer.

I also hope the defense has a nice simple map and timeline in case this video animation is not accepted.

The only thing they really need to get in that hasn’t been brought up yet, is where Trayvon was staying and why he didn’t just head/stay home in the 40 plus seconds he had after he started running.

That seems to be the crucial point to me, the rest of this is just not necessary.

    Ragspierre in reply to fogflyer. | July 9, 2013 at 7:00 pm

    In Texas, attorneys can discuss the case with witnesses.

    No harm; no foul.

      archtyrx in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:02 pm

      who cares what they do in texas?

      Jazzizhep in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:09 pm

      hey rags, is there a diff between a witness such as Good who was both a pros. and def. witness, and one that is still on the stand and under oath such as Diamond Dee-Dee when she was called back for a second day?

        Ragspierre in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 9, 2013 at 7:11 pm

        Can’t speak with authority as to Florida, but generally, YOUR witness (one you are sponsoring) during your case-in-chief is to be interrogated with non-leading questions, if that’s what you mean.

          Jazzizhep in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:14 pm

          sorry, my bad…i meant as respect to this specific topic…Dee-Dee was told not to discuss the case during recess for the night, but of course lawyers can talk to their witnesses..i think that was his initial confusion—and mine

          archtyrx in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 8:25 pm

          you can’t speak with authority as to anything.

      fogflyer in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:14 pm

      I hope you are right, but Nelson didn’t seem too happy about it.

        Jazzizhep in reply to fogflyer. | July 9, 2013 at 7:17 pm

        the alternative would be that the State could call every defense witness and say “nyaa nyaa nyaa nyaa nyaa” you can’t talk to your witnesses

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:21 pm

      Florida could have a rule restricting talking to a witness, so I dunno.

      HOWEVER, as a general proposition, an attorney is allowed to meet with ANY witness they chose to, but ESPECIALLY one they are sponsoring as their own.

      Think of the effects if a prosecution witness could not be interviewed by the defense, or vice-versa.

        fogflyer in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:43 pm

        I think this was different though.
        Good met with this animation guy and OMara while he was still under sequestration as a witness.
        I am thinking it is something like when she told Dee Dee she wasn’t to anybody.

        I don’t know though. Sounds like you didn’t actually see it, right?
        Nelson was NOT pleased.
        I am sure we will hear more.

      kittycat in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:28 pm

      Ragspierre,

      Yea for Texas! My state, too! Was born here, never lived anyplace else.

    Aridog in reply to fogflyer. | July 9, 2013 at 7:15 pm

    Exactly the same thing is bothering me…why no one is making an issue of time, distance and how Martin got back to the “tee” from in front of his place of staying.

Mantei is making funny faces and gestures as he asks his questions. Looks like he is bullying or making fun of the witness.

Is this a technique prosecutors (and lawyers in general) use to upset witnesses and throw them out of their line of thought?

    Ragspierre in reply to Exiliado. | July 9, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    Yes. It also throws signals to the jury.

    One of the signals is, “I’m a total smart-ass” unless you do it carefully and with their permission.

Humphreys Executor | July 9, 2013 at 6:59 pm

This has been bugging me through-out — what is with all this re-crossing and sur-direct! They are really lose down there.

Been away at a new client intake conference.

SOOooooo… Shrewd guess, Dr. Defense did really well on cross…?

Yes or no?

BrianMacker | July 9, 2013 at 7:16 pm

I don’t like this idea of using a computer animation as evidence. It either matches the actual evidence or doesn’t. How is the jury supposed to tell what aspects of the video are extraneous interpretation and what is actually fact based. A jury might watch the video as evidence and then combine some arbitrary choice the animator made with some real evidence to deduce some true testimony is false, or false true. The animation is really only one theory about what happened. They should be told that, and also told to decide if it fits the evidence presented.

Would someone please explain this crap to me? Why is O’Mara fighting this issue so hard? Why is the Judge testifying about what is in her notes and trying to influence this issue so much? I am completely lost, it makes no sense to me… What am I missing?

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 7:21 pm

    Through his questioning, Mantei basically demonstrated reasonable doubt inasmuch as he repeatedly pointed out that pertinent details aren’t knowable and haven’t been testified to, especially relating to the timing of events.

    The judge has done as much herself as well.

    That’s the way I see it.

    Exiliado in reply to DriveBy. | July 9, 2013 at 7:29 pm

    My question is:

    Why is the prosecution fighting so hard to exclude it?

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Exiliado. | July 9, 2013 at 7:47 pm

      Maybe because it might spark the defense to call GZ to the stand? Maybe they also just don’t want the jury to have a visual memory of what took place.

        Exactly.

        That was my point when I asked:

        Which party would benefit from not having the jurors “see” all the events/evidence put together in a recreation?

JackRussellTerrierist | July 9, 2013 at 7:17 pm

You can see Nelson’s belligerence toward the defense on her face. Her animosity is palpable.

If the judge is asking things like “How do you know this or that detail of the defense”, where the hell was she with those questions when BdlR & Co. were pulling nonsense out of their asses claiming GZ did this or that?

    Yes you can see it in her face and her “omissions” alright. If she allows the animation in, it will be because she is convinced it helps the prosecution. I just do not understand the defense on this “cartoon” bit [that IS what it is, like it or not]…it seemed like volunteering to fight with one hand tied behind their back…I had to quit watching the hearing.

      Ragspierre in reply to Aridog. | July 9, 2013 at 7:33 pm

      Judges tend to be a conservative lot…meaning, they like to stay in the well-worn ruts.

      They are made uncomfortable by innovation, and it is always a safer road to steer to keep to the old, and eschew the new.

        Exiliado in reply to Ragspierre. | July 9, 2013 at 7:44 pm

        However, it seems to me that the judge is somewhat impressed with the fanciness of the animation.

        I think deep inside she wants to admit it, but I agree it would be only for demonstrative purposes, only to present the defense’s case on closing.

Mantei is arguing that THESE EXACT CIRCUMSTANCES haven’t been testified to…. well, DUH, NO CASE is exactly alike.

I get the feeling that the Judge wants to let this in, but she is still giving the prosecution EVERY opportunity to try and shoot it down.

The muted TV I have in the background just showed images of Amanda Barnes in a lime green wig; thank you so much Entertainment Tonight for some sanity in this world! (Sarc)

I think she’s going to let it in as demonstrative only, for use in closing arguments, but not as introduced evidence for the jury.

eaglesdontflock | July 9, 2013 at 7:37 pm

A boxer uses both fists. What is pros getting at?

Uncle Samuel | July 9, 2013 at 7:41 pm

Mantei is trying to prevent O’Mara from demonstrating the Zimmerman narrative, but he continues to present the Crump fictional narrative every chance he gets…with every cross examination, etc. with wisecracks, sarcasm, emotionality, pathos dramatizations.

He and Bernie call Zimmerman a murderer every time they possibly can. Poisonous words/talking points that they use to sway the jury (and the masses threatening to riot).

This is an ugly inequity.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 7:43 pm

    The Prosecution uses prejudicial words and statements at every opportunity.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 7:46 pm

      Mantei, Guy and dela Rionda can state the prosecution’s claims and theories, but O’Mara and West can’t state Zimmerman’s Self Defense claims.

      This is WRONG.

        Exiliado in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 7:52 pm

        Having this trial is wrong in the first place.

        Florida law is very clear in this point, hence the need for a fraudulent probable cause affidavit.

Carol Herman | July 9, 2013 at 7:41 pm

The court is pretty empty. Mantei is arguing why the stills from the animation should not come in … And, the camera moves all the way back. There are 12 chairs (or more) in what I’d call the “jury box.” And, there’s no evidence anyone takes notes. Because the seats are clean on their “bottoms.” Nobody layed a note pad down for t’marra.

As to one comment from the “Tennis” lady … whose tweets are readable below the “live” broadcast. In this particular “tweet” she said “it was selfish, but she’d like Nelson to NOT allow in this animation.” Are we in “reversal territory?” I’ve never seen a judge go on this long. Nelson really hates O’Mara.

    Matt in FL in reply to Carol Herman. | July 9, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    Your stream of consciousness comments are mindbending to read.

    First, it looked to me like there were notepads on the chairs. But if there aren’t any right now, that’s because a court officer collected them. You don’t think they just leave them on the chairs overnight, do you? Using that as evidence that nobody takes notes is just ludicrous. It’s a completely irrational conclusion.

    Second, about the Diana Tennis tweets, what is your point? You said, “As to one comment from the “Tennis” lady … whose tweets are readable below the “live” broadcast. In this particular “tweet” she said “it was selfish, but she’d like Nelson to NOT allow in this animation.”” And? What’s your question? I wouldn’t put to much stock in what Diana Tennis says, as she was a little goofy at the start of the trial, and it’s gotten steadily worse. She’s said at least three jaw-droppingly stupid things today alone.

    “Are we in “reversal territory?”” For what reason? That’s an incredibly general question.

    “I’ve never seen a judge go on this long.” How much experience do you have watching judges? It seems to me she’s giving a thorough hearing to this issue. If it’s past your bedtime, feel free to tune out.

    “Nelson really hates O’Mara.” This is just stupid. They have an occasionally adversarial professional relationship. Nothing more needs to be read into it. They may disagree, but I seriously doubt it rises to the level of personal animosity for either one of them.

Look at the spectators. It’s hilarious.

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?

Uncle Samuel | July 9, 2013 at 8:17 pm

I sure hope they have a witness to talk about Trayvon’s use of drugs and the effects of those on his mental state and behavior (aggression and paranoia).

This judge loses control of her courtroom very often. I think thats b/c she lets prosecutors to go on about a matter and then when defense goes to rebut it she denies them the chance and then chaos starts.

eaglesdontflock | July 9, 2013 at 8:18 pm

Mantei is an example of where we get our elected officials. Prosecutor to DA to AG to Governor to Congress to private island and unlimited wealth.

This Judge is a travesty. Bias should never be this obvious and disrespectful of officers of the court. Judge Nelson, it’s time for you to retire.

Why is the judge going so long into the day. Doesn’t the defense deserve every chance to prove it’s case, without rushing through it. Defense never should have told judge they thought they’d finish on Wed. now she’ll stick to that even if they go all night.

TM must have copied texts and other items to a microSD card he wanted to save.

KrazyCrackaEsq | July 9, 2013 at 9:18 pm

I think either Mommy, Daddy, or their attorney got a hold of TrayTray’s phone and tried to clean it up.

Nelson has a hard on for West. She treats Mantei like a favored son.

    Dennis23 in reply to Dennis23. | July 9, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    Yo srsly, bei Andrew Branca’s book, dawg, dat shits fo real. Got me 1 nd cnt wait 4 it 2 get 2 my crib.

These prosecutors are living in fantasyland. “There’s nothing in there about this”. What a lie. That is what it is all about.

eaglesdontflock | July 9, 2013 at 9:53 pm

This Judge is bizarre.

eaglesdontflock | July 9, 2013 at 9:56 pm

So much for a preponderance of the evidence.

eaglesdontflock | July 9, 2013 at 9:58 pm

Unbelievable….

Holy Shit!

A 7 year old could figure out what it took an expert almost a year to do?
Crazy stuff
I’m not an attorney, what do y’all think will come from the fireworks at the end of today?

Some three sided fireworks at the end, and it was obvious that Judge Nelson and others were under great stress after a marathon day. Her disdain for the evidence on TM’s phone was remarkable, suggesting any 7 year old might have broken the passwords and contaminated the evidence. Reversible errors in abundance.

This is ridiculous. How in blue blazes is the defense supposed to know what they will be doing tomorrow morning? The judge wants witnesses there so the jury can start at 9:00, and the defense doesn’t even know what he rulings will be.

The bias this judge is displaying is unbelievable.

The judge is too dense to realize that the photos and texts SELF-AUTHENTICATE. It was a picture taken of Trayvon BY THAT CAMERA. That picture was in a DOULBE LAYERED password protected hidden file. Included were te texts about fighting.

If it is a photo taken BY THAT CAMERA of Trayon, in a double protected hidden file, and the phone was in his possession, how convoluted do you have to be to think someone else was doing all that and not Martin?

AND THE JUDGE WOULD NOT GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITY TO AUTHETICATE IT?

Reversible error is what I see.

    fogflyer in reply to Bryan24. | July 9, 2013 at 10:18 pm

    Yes, the case law she was quoting said just an email address or telephone # is not enough to authenticate. Agreed. But what about a double password protected hidden program?!?!? Come on!

    That is the whole purpose of the hidden, password protected program is that NOBODY but the owner can access it, or even know it is there.

    Pretty obvious how she is going to rule…. And I call BS!

To top it all off, she was adamant that court would resume in just 10 hours, allowing the defense no time to shower, much less to prepare their questions or coordinate their witnesses. West and O’Mara were visibly upset at that lack of consideration.

Wow!
That was quite the dramatic ending!
Well, see you guys in 10 hours!


Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend