Image 01 Image 03

Zimmerman Trial Day 9: Live Video, Analysis of State’s Case & Witnesses

Zimmerman Trial Day 9: Live Video, Analysis of State’s Case & Witnesses

I trust that everyone had a safe and satisfying celebration of the birthday of the greatest nation on earth yesterday, and that no fireworks were left unexpended (if any were left unexpended, deduct 10% from “man-card”–and for Pete’s sake, don’t tell anybody).

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.

During the lunch recess, or immediately thereafter, we will post 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.

ALERT! Court started at 8:40AM, early than expected. Trayvon Martin’s mother, Sabryna Fulton, is currently on the stand. It is anticipated that the State will finish with the last of its witnesses today and rest its case. At that point I expect the defense will submit a motion for a directed verdict, Judge Nelson will deny the motion, and the defense will begin to present its case.

Yesterday I posted up a general 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.)

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

Friday, July 5 Commentary

. . .


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. July 5, 2013 is the LAST DAY to take advantage of the 30% pre-order discount, only $35, plus free shipping. To do so simply visit the Law of Self Defense blog.

BREAKING: “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition” is now also being carried by Amazon.com, at list price but with a commitment for 2-day delivery.  A Kindle version to come within a week or so (I hope).

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


It corroborates Zimmerman’s testimony that “He looks like he’s on drugs….”

    Marco100 in reply to WilliamJD. | July 5, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    Maybe it tox showed PCP or some sort of drug known to cause aggression and defense had an expert to testify to it, yes you’re right.

    I don’t know that an indeterminate level of blood level THC is generally thought to cause aggressive behavior though.

Even viewing the “victim” in the best light possible, how can a toxicology report on the “victim” who may have been the aggressor not be admissible?

It Wasn’t Me (I Didn’t Do It) Video by: Shaggy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g5Hz17C4is

“Certainly not wet soggy soil.”

Good one west.

I feel sorry for the family having to hear about the total incompetence and disregard with which their son’s case treated.

    I do not feel in the slightest bit sorry for either $$ybrina Fulton or Tracy Martin. I already know too much about their background.

    On the other hand, I feel for Alicia Stanley, the woman who actually raised Trayvon Martin because all of this is in fact hurting her.

True. Stoners aren’t known for their aggressiveness. But it raises the possibility of other drug use and reflects on the character of that “sweet Trayvon”.

    styro1 in reply to creeper. | July 5, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    But it does cause paranoia.

      Marco100 in reply to styro1. | July 5, 2013 at 2:23 pm

      Maybe it can cause paranoia sometimes, but there’s probably no expert for the defense who was willing to testify to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that TM was paranoid on the night of his death due to doobie consumption.

        Yes, it can cause paranoia and I actually think that is relevant in this case.

        What people who are users etc do not understand is that the more than casual use can in fact lead to long term mental illness, including paranoia. However, I would suspect that perhaps another drug was involved, not just the THC, which the cousin has admitted that they used the previous night in the garage at Brandy’s home.

    txantimedia in reply to creeper. | July 5, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    But stoners are none for very poor judgment – like running to safety and then running back to a fight.

      Ragspierre in reply to txantimedia. | July 5, 2013 at 2:23 pm

      So are adolescent boys.

      Marco100 in reply to txantimedia. | July 5, 2013 at 2:25 pm

      It’s probably better for the defense to leave the issue a “mystery” to the jury anyway unless the defense could show Trayvon having a prior track record of smoking ganja and getting aggressive.

      Generally speaking most folks don’t respond to MJ that way. They get passive, play video games, and eat Doritos.

        caambers in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 2:30 pm

        I’ve heard Funyuns are popular…..

        wyntre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm

        But there ARE other reactions including distorted perception,
        trouble with thinking and problem-solving, increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure and feelings of anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.

        If Martin was drunk, or had cocaine or heroin in his system wouldn’t that be relevant?

        What if he was high on ecstasy, amphetamines, pain-killers, etc.

    Fen in reply to creeper. | July 5, 2013 at 3:40 pm

    I disagree. True stoners can be very aggressive WHEN THEY ARE NOT STONED. Their behavior seesaws, peaks and valleys. Very calm when they are on weed. But if they have (basically) been high for a week and then run out, for the next few days they are like a guy trying to quit coffee or cigs.

    And the “filters” that most of us use to remain calm when stressed out? The potheads haven’t needed to excercise such mental discipline.

    Really wish someone would do a study on that.

      Well that unstoned aggressiveness is a function of PTSD. And my guess is that Tray – due to his upbringing had PTSD bad.

        that PTSD would have appeared only after he was sent back to Traymom.

        I doubt that he had PTSD from his time living with Alicia Stanley who was his stepmother and who was the one who raised him most of the time.

You know, if the people in that courtroom were even half as smart as the people on this blog, you and I would be doing something else right now.

edwardhotel | July 5, 2013 at 2:22 pm

Just when you thought this trial could not possibly get any worse .. here comes Dr Bao! This guy should be fired before Monday morning.

    Marco100 in reply to edwardhotel. | July 5, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    He won’t be fired, they have to circle the wagons now and he would file a multi million dollar discrimination/whistle blower suit if they fire him.

    He just guaranteed himself lifetime employment with the state of florida.

      Exiliado in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:10 pm

      I don’t think anyone would buy the discrimination BS after this sheer demonstration of incompetence.

Dr Bao said he was the assistant medical examiner and not responsible for making sure the autopsy was done correctly. I would love to see the look on his Boss’s face right now.

txantimedia | July 5, 2013 at 2:25 pm

I think I’ve figured out why Dr. Bao has moved from state to state to state. The lawyers have begged the jurisdictions to get rid of him before they shot themselves in the head from frustration over his “testimony”.

I thought he didn’t have any memories.

inquisitivemind | July 5, 2013 at 2:27 pm

shooting holes in the accuracy of the blood drawn –

Three weeks ago Dr. Bao went to the movies and saw “World War Z” and realized that corpes could spontaneously re-animate.

That’s the basis for him changing his testimony.

Bao “real” self-defense in other case if I heard that correctly.

Now Dr. Bao is saying his “knowledge” is from a case he didn’t even autopsy.

How can this not be a mistrial?

WTF He just said a “real” self defense case. This is such BS!

This is all absolute cr&p. Bao is testifying about unrelated facts from another case which he didn’t even autopsy, which he never made known as a basis of his opinion change until today.

Bulletin in other case went thru heart and liver whereas this was heart lung? Did I hear this right? Two different organs?

[…] am watching the trial right now on Zimmerman Trial | Live video | Prosecution Witnesses I must agree, this Dr. Bao is a fruit cake and a nut job. He claims to know all about this case and […]

eaglesdontflock | July 5, 2013 at 2:32 pm

Declaration of death not made until emergency measures are concluded. If CPR for 10 minutes, death occurs when stopped.

He knows more about a case he didn’t perform than this 1.

West is running out the clock now….

Oh now he can make some noises and can move a little bit?

Testimony is changing, changing….

I think the defense is now entitled to full discovery on the OTHER autopsy that Bao says he relied on to formulate this opinion…

“I think he was able to move a little bit.”

Could he move his hands or legs or sit up?

“I don’t know.”

Perfect, witnessed impeached, easily predictable, Marco100 predicted it LOL.

    Ragspierre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 2:38 pm

    Hmmm… Now your testimony is changing.

    You wanted him struck…!!!

    I LOVE DR. BOA.

    Right up there with DeeDee.

Now he is backing off no movement or sound and saying he doesn’t know even though he said the opposite previously.

eaglesdontflock | July 5, 2013 at 2:34 pm

Wow. Disallowing a request to approach.

“EXCUSE ME DR. BAO!”

Finally Nelson admonishes the good dr.

Oh my goodness. He has completely reversed all of his original testimony, based on one case three weeks ago. This sickens me. How does this guy have a job in this field?

    Marco100 in reply to MegK. | July 5, 2013 at 2:38 pm

    Firing him would be deemed racist. So he is quietly passed along from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

    Possibly, I’m merely speculating, perhaps this case aside Dr. Bao is quite the Quincy/brilliant ME.

    javajana in reply to MegK. | July 5, 2013 at 3:53 pm

    the same way the prosecuting attorneys have kept their jobs, as well as their performance reflects on all attorneys, sadly. I have refrained from responding in defense of forensic pathologists who may be ashamed about this pathetic testimony, but I know someone well who does this for a living (and btw, pathologists do very necessary work that is relied upon by almost all other physicians, – but there are bad apples and not-so-bright examples in this specialty like any other {and forensics is but a sub-sub specialty}. They did go to the same medical schools as your own doctors, it is no way a specialty chosen by someone ‘who can’t do anything else’, and they do have contact with ‘real living’ people too – often the families seeking reasons for their loved ones’ death as well as occasional testifying. And many if not most autopsies are not criminal cases). As someone else commented earlier, this doctor IS a govt employee – MEs in FL are employed by the counties. And many parts of the process are out of the doctor’s hands – crime scene, transport, techs, etc. as well as LEO that put pressure on them at times to ‘prove’ a crime when the evidence at autopsy cannot always do that (kind of like we are seeing here perhaps?!?!). For example, the autopsy may show without a doubt a person died by drowning; but whether they fell or were pushed into the water is out of the realm of the doctor to say without other data. Forensic science is not like portrayed in the movies any more than real law practice mimics TV shows. ANyway, that was pitiful testimony, but fitting for this show trial. Like someone else said earlier, it would be unbelievable as a movie plot!

inquisitivemind | July 5, 2013 at 2:35 pm

Nobody knows TM’s autopsy better than me…except for one thing…you can’t remember anything about it!
Priceless

    BubbaLeroy in reply to inquisitivemind. | July 5, 2013 at 2:41 pm

    Bao: “Nobody knows more about this autopsy than I do.”

    West: “But you can’t remember anything about it.”

    ROFLMAO

I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall for this clowns meeting with BDLR yesterday. I imagine BDLR was telling him your our only hope b/c all our other witnesses have crapped out.

I seriously cannot believe this miscarriage is being broadcast live across the country and hardly any of the media seem to care that the masses are apathetic to liberty dying right before our eyes.

That should have been bullet -not bulletin- I hate auto complete

WARNING: another few minutes on the stand and Dr. Bao will have a brand new opinion!

So once West is done, and prosecution follows up if need be then State will rest, if it is 3:30 pm will she expect defense to start this afternoon? Seems she was adamant that defense had to start as soon as State rests.

    Marco100 in reply to bizbach. | July 5, 2013 at 2:40 pm

    West is running out the clock to have the weekend for prep time.

    He will keep going until 5:00 p.m. or midnight if he needs to and given Bao’s ridiculousness on direct she can’t very well stop him.

    BDLR is keeping his mouth shut since now he’s got to be concerned about saving his law license, an appellate court could always reverse Nelson’s Richardson ruling.

    That’s ALL BDLR probably cares about now LOL.

      BubbaLeroy in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 2:44 pm

      I would think the defense would prefer to call one of the defense witnesses before the weekend so that the defense testimony would be the last thing that the jury hears. I think I would start with one of GZ’s family members to testify that it was definitely GZ screaming for help.

      wyntre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 2:55 pm

      So glad lawyers are posting on this blog to translate wtf is going on.

      I was pretty confused before logging on.

Dear Governor Scott,

I am watching the George Zimmerman trial live on the Internet and what I am seeing is very disturbing. The medical examiner who is testifying at this time, Dr. Bao, does not, in my opinion, have sufficient competency to fulfill the duties of his office. I request, as a citizen of Florida, that you use whatever powers you possess, as you have with other officials who have not fulfilled the duties of their office, to investigate, and act if appropriate, to relieve Dr. Bao of his duties.

http://www.flgov.com/contact-gov-scott/email-the-governor/

We need the re-animated corpse of Jack Klugman to testify and straighten all of this out.

FLA really does itself proud, when the national spotlight shines on them, doesn’t it?

Can’t run a clean, competent electoral system, and now the entire legal system looks like it’s riddled with incompetence.

    Immolate in reply to avwh. | July 5, 2013 at 4:02 pm

    What do you expect? We’re all just creepy a$$ crackahs down here in the sunshine state. That and a metric butt-load of New Yorkers and people from other uninhabitable climes.

    it is not the first time that the Florida system has been shining in this way. Remember the Teri Schiavo case? She was blind and a probate court judge condemned her to death.

edwardhotel | July 5, 2013 at 2:39 pm

I have to say it … “Is this really happening?” what I am watching must be being broadcast from the planet Bizarro.

I bet West is looking back fondly on his cross of RJ right now.

Check MSN.com just now for a perfect example of how the media selectively pulls what it wants in support of the ‘Trayvon is the innocent victim’ narrative, to embellish his ‘suffering’, based on this guy’s (Bao’s) wild-ass-guess-about-the-autopsy-about-which-he-remembers-nothing.

Duke Powell | July 5, 2013 at 2:42 pm

I’m not a lawyer. But it appears to me that the Defense is expertly setting the table for THEIR rebuttal of this rather inarticulate witness.

It’s gonna be a massacre.

    Matt in FL in reply to Duke Powell. | July 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    @Duke Powell: You’re correct that they’re setting up for their later defense. The book that West asked him about consulting, by Dr. Vincent Di Maio. The defense is going to call Dr. Di Maio as their witness. The defense’s witness literally wrote the book on the subject, the book to which this guy refers when he needs information.

The scary part is when you realize ME’s like Rao and Bao do this kind of thing with all of their cases, incl. lots of indigent but possibly innocent criminal defendants who can’t afford a million dollar defense team.

Bao is doing this in this case because it’s PAR FOR THE COURSE. S.O.P. standard operating procedure and unless you have the dineros for hotshot defense team there’s nothing you can do about it if you’re the defendant.

    Ragspierre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 2:48 pm

    And their analogs are running your state and federal agencies.

    And they know how make your choices for you, better than you can.

    Great, great object lesson.

He can’t remember anything about his meeting yesterday with BdlR, but he sure can remember that case from three weeks ago.

Intermediate range memory!

    Matt in FL in reply to Fabi. | July 5, 2013 at 2:46 pm

    He has a slot memory. He can remember anything that occurred more than one week and less than one month prior to today, but that range moves with time.

eaglesdontflock | July 5, 2013 at 2:43 pm

Anna Nicole Smith. We need her judge.

OMGWTF ‘it’s not my job to define range’

eaglesdontflock | July 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm

I could not remember anything…….he said that.

“I could not remember anything.”

West did what he needed to do on cross. He got Bao to admit that TM could have moved around after being shot.

    wyntre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Not a lawyer but it sure seemed the judge is hostile to West.

    Can the judge be removed, cited, disciplined, taken off the case for extreme bias?

Here goes BDLR yelling and waving arms.

rabid wombat | July 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm

Col. Jessep: I’ll answer the question!

[to Kaffee]

Col. Jessep: You want answers?

Kaffee: I think I’m entitled to.

Col. Jessep: *You want answers?*

Kaffee: *I want the truth!*

Col. Jessep: *You can’t handle the truth!*

lol he only has memory when speaking to BDLR

West should have asked the witness a hypothetical about the direction of the gunshot wound using the defense theory about the relative positions of Martin and Zimmerman to establish that the direction of the gunshot wound is consistent with the defense.

    Tertullus in reply to rhorton1. | July 5, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    Why ask when you don’t know what he will say? The defense medical examiner will testify to this. And a lot, lot more.

      rhorton1 in reply to Tertullus. | July 5, 2013 at 3:14 pm

      Through skilfull questioning the ME would have to agree with the defense position. And its always best to get positive evidence before the jury using a government witness.

        Pauldd in reply to rhorton1. | July 6, 2013 at 8:16 am

        Getting the state’s expert to agree with the defendant’s position is usually a good tactic. I am not sure it is worth the effort with this witness. His opinion is pretty much worthless for either side.

    Voluble in reply to rhorton1. | July 5, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    We are going to get testimony about the weather now… at least the weather a few miles away. Which means we will have to have an expert to say the weather can vary street to street as far as rain etc…

    It will be a wonder if none of the jurors don’t hang themselves.

He didn’t take pictures and wasn’t there for them being taken how does he remember examining the hands.

    Marco100 in reply to styro1. | July 5, 2013 at 2:53 pm

    He doesn’t remember anything and it wasn’t his job. But now it was his job to look and remember.

    Vomit.

He can’t remember anything but he remembers looking at TM’s hands?

Why should there be injury to TM’s palms?

No, your body goes into rigor mortis. Dr. It’s called “rigor mortis.” Not: “the body curls up.”

LOL what a joke this is.

What does pugilistic response of body have to do with the testimony presented?

Dr Bao: TM couldn’t speak or move after being shot. TM could speak or move after being shot.
I don’t know if TM could move or not after being shot.

Inigo Montoya: He’s dead. He can’t talk.

Miracle Max: Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There’s a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive.

BDLR: Dr. Bao, you drew blood for DNA testing, correct?

West should ask: Dr. Bao, for what other purposes, if any, did you draw blood?

‘According to my new memory.’ There’s a t-shirt slogan!

According to my new memory, that I formulated after consuming a healthy portion of Gen. Tsao’s chicken during the lunch break…

“I believe brain is minimal functioning”

“But I don’t know Trayvon Martin’s case.”

No he couldn’t do jumping jacks, I don’t think that’s part of the defense’s case.

SOMEONE’S brain is “minimal functioning”, I wonder who that could be?

If body is falling forward you would have palms out to break your fall. How many people fall forward with hands in a fist like position?

He’s using 1 previous case to predict what everyone else does in same situation but with other injuries. This is a man of science? He’d do great with climate science.

There would be abrasions on the palms if he fell with his palms out.

There weren’t.

    pausebreak in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Exactly! Falling forward would also have fingers outspread to break the fall and falling into the grass would have left, at a minimum, grass stains or grass residue on the palms

    Marco, I am an expert in tripping and falling (lol) with lots of experience in a period that spans more than 40 years.

    Only sometimes do the palms end up with minor scratches. Trouble is, I do not recall each event very clearly to be able to totally attest to when my palms went out or not 🙂

    However, I can comment on when I fell backwards and popped a fracture in my elbow because instinctively my hands went out to break my fall. Oh and that time I fell on the concrete and scraped my head, my palms would have been flat beneath my body….

    So yes, it depends upon the circumstances and if TM was throwing a punch at the time he was shot, it would be his fist that hit the concrete or the ground first.

Apparently Dr. Bao never heard of Trace Adkins who was shot through the heart by his wife and lived through it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trace_Adkins

LilMissSpellcheck | July 5, 2013 at 3:03 pm

Shiping Bao. That’s the greeting of respect that Japanese UPS drivers perform before handing over your Amazon purchases,yes?

Re: Trace, from his wiki:

“He has also experienced a number of serious injuries as an adult, including being shot by his ex-wife in 1994.[29] The bullet went through his heart and both lungs. He survived and chose not to press charges.”

There are rumors in the media that BDLR might recall RJ next b/c the jurors aren’t confused enough.

Carol Herman | July 5, 2013 at 3:04 pm

With this Chinese medical examiner, the place you should go to look for an injury, is right into republican governor’s Rick Scott’s office.

Rick Scott probably thought this case would propel him into fame, so he could reach the Oval Office. And, instead, he’s looking at a mess where he might not even be re-elected come November’s ballot.

Rick Scott came from the private sector. In the private sector he had been charged with committing fraud, when he was CEO of Columbia’s Hospital organization. He’s known to make snap judgements. That he comes to regret.

I hope the Citizens of Florida are taking note.

I especially love Bao’s insistence, that “he doesn’t have to know,” “because it’s not his job.”

Will people remember this was the day Sebrina Martin took the stand? Will they remember her son, Jar-Jar-vits … as being a close look-alike to Trayvon?

    Carol this is more of your mumbo jumbo and crap.

    This ME was on the scene prior to interference by Rick Scott. Even, I, a foreigner know that fact!!

Guy doing commentary on Channel 9 actually said that BDLR is a smart guy. Everything I’ve witnessed the last 2 weeks leads me to believe that he isn’t too bright.

JackRussellTerrierist | July 5, 2013 at 3:06 pm

Did LI wimp out on covering Sabrina on the stand? There are no tweets and almost no comments, nothing from Andrew at the lunch break update.

What’s up?

LilMissSpellcheck | July 5, 2013 at 3:09 pm

Sabrina evaded any possible damage to her wrongful death suit.

I can’t fathom why the state would put this guy on last and not Sybrina Fulton. Even if he hadn’t been such a train wreck his testimony wasn’t all that meaningful.

    Marco100 in reply to MegK. | July 5, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    Because according to BDLR he didn’t know Bao was going to change his testimony at the last minute.

      Ragspierre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:17 pm

      “Object!

      Non-responsive; move to strike.”

      MegK in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:36 pm

      Yes, but even if he hadn’t changed his testimony I don’t think his original testimony was of all that much note either. The “he couldn’t have possibly moved” maybe, but that wasn’t believable and could have been easily refuted anyway.

LilMissSpellcheck | July 5, 2013 at 3:10 pm

Sybrina. Sorry.

Whats to really comment on? She said he wore a button and thats TM screaming.

Channel 9 Sanford analysts talking about possible “reversible error” because Nelson didn’t allow new evidence requested by West?

    Ragspierre in reply to wyntre. | July 5, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    Every time you ask the judge for a ruling, you are offering them a chance to commit error.

    Not all error is significant to an appeal. Judges have to make snap judgments on sometimes very close issues of law, so nobody is really surprised that they are sometimes wrong.

    This case…on substance…is WAY better for the defense than the catalog of errors by this judge. That would completely change if there is a conviction.

I went through two law enforcement academies – one state and one federal – and testified about a thousand times. It was drilled into us that witnesses can only testify about what they REMEMBER. Your notes were not evidence and couldn’t substitute for your memory. The procedure was for the witness to say, “I don’t recall.” The prosecutor/defense asks if there’s anything that would help refresh your recollection. “Yes, my notes.” The witness reads the notes, turns them face down or hands them back. “Does that reflect your recollection?” Answer is yes or no. If yes, you testify to what you remember, if no, you’re pretty much done, on that point at least. This guy, I’ve never seen anything like it. I get that he’s allowed to give an opinion as an expert, but this is just ridiculous. How can he give an opinion based on facts he doesn’t remember even AFTER they show him the notes?

    Ragspierre in reply to Kiera. | July 5, 2013 at 3:19 pm

    That would be true of a fact witness.

    It is not true of an expert.

      WilliamJD in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2013 at 3:29 pm

      He is a fact witness.

        Ragspierre in reply to WilliamJD. | July 5, 2013 at 3:36 pm

        No. He was qualified as an expert.

        As I noted elsewhere, an expert OFTEN has no recollection of facts about which they testify. Because they weren’t any place to have made observations of events.

        Experts, under most evidentiary rules of which I know, are allowed to use whatever other experts reasonably rely on in reaching their testimony. Your own contemporaneous notes would certainly be an example.

        Think about a cop who investigates hundreds of accidents every year, who is called to testify years late when a matter FINALLY comes to trial.

    wyntre in reply to Kiera. | July 5, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    Hehehe.

    “How can he give an opinion based on facts he doesn’t remember even AFTER they show him the notes?”

    Rick in reply to Kiera. | July 5, 2013 at 3:25 pm

    If the witness had made the notes as part of her official duties, as part of her job description, the notes could be introduce as “past recollection recorded,” at least here in California, even if the witness had no independent recollection of the events.

    bigdancehawk in reply to Kiera. | July 5, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    You weren’t given the full picture by your teachers. There are two things involved: memory refreshed and past recollection recorded. Apparently, you were only taught the first. Even if a witness has no present recollection, he may be allowed to testify about the contents of notes made contemporaneously or shortly after the event in question.

eaglesdontflock | July 5, 2013 at 3:17 pm

It is pouring less than a mile from me now. Not raining here. So if it’s less than a mile, can’t depend on report.

    Matt in FL in reply to eaglesdontflock. | July 5, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    It’s 3.446 miles from the spot of the shooting to the middle of the city park in question. I live in Florida. Grew up here. We have a saying: “Welcome to Florida. If you don’t like the weather, come back in 15 minutes.”

    I have, on more than one occasion, most recently about a month ago, seen it absolutely pouring on one side of my house, and dry on the other. That pouring rain did not move to the dry side, but stopped without a drop ever falling in the pool on the backside.

      AmberK in reply to Matt in FL. | July 5, 2013 at 3:49 pm

      I lived in Florida for most of my youth, and I remember looking out a sunny window, while my mom on the other side of the house told me I couldn’t go out because it was raining.

      The weather FEET away can be insanely different, anything over half a mile is just not even considered close enough to consider important.

Why don’t they ask Dr. Bao what his opinion of the weather was? Like the weather, his opinion will change every 5 minutes.

State wants to add an exhibit for weather from a station 5-6 miles away when witnesses already stated it was pouring rain most of the night.

Now the judge is a weather expert? How can she admit evidence without corroborating testimony or stipulation?

And of course she over rules defense objection. It can be clear in one location and be raining in another miles away.

Here we go! The judge is on the hot seat. Will she do her sworn duty or balk?

kentuckyliz | July 5, 2013 at 3:23 pm

OK I am listening carefully now. Mr. Branca, Esq. will have to post this clip and explanation. Cases about acquittal judgment based on circumstantial evidence even if all presented evidence interpreted in favor of the state…he’s talking fast because they know this stuff and I don’t. I need the remedial law school.

kentuckyliz | July 5, 2013 at 3:25 pm

I agree about wx microzones. Friends who live a mile away tweet about black sky horrible storm, it’s still sunny and calm at my house. Any data from that neighborhood? Wind speed would relate to wind tunnel conditions with that opening between those long buildings.

Sorry MOM but since there’s a dead man on the pavement you won’t get a directed verdict.

I think Bao just showed that he didn’t think a black guy getting killed warranted any extraordinary examination of the remains. As a ME he just showed how he felt it was of no import to conduct a truly thorough examination until this case made headlines and now that his findings are under scrutiny he is back peddling to save his a@@as well as try to show he had no bias when it came to his autopsy. Dollars to donuts he thought it was a slam dunk case of black on black crime and therefore didn’t need to do due diligence and now it is biting him in the butt

kentuckyliz | July 5, 2013 at 3:26 pm

The state has presented an enormous amount of evidence showing that my client acted in self defense. BOOM

This ruling about the weather testimony highlights what I said about the judge being selectively protective of wasting the jury’s time. She hides behind them when it is convenient.

    BubbaLeroy in reply to Voluble. | July 5, 2013 at 3:29 pm

    So now the defense will have to call a meteorologist to testify that it can be raining cats and dogs in one spot and not raining 5 miles away. How does that not waste the jury’s time?

      Voluble in reply to BubbaLeroy. | July 5, 2013 at 3:34 pm

      Exactly. She has made it necessary to not only waste time today but also when the defense puts on its case.

I wish there was a camera on the Judge while O’Mara is talking.

I wonder if she’s even listening

This is probably making it to a textbook.

Lay man here – How soon could the judge grant an acquittal? How long before ‘crackers’ should start fearing for their lives? Not kidding/honestly concerned

    styro1 in reply to mas337. | July 5, 2013 at 3:34 pm

    Right now after the state gets to rebut defenses motion for directed verdict.

    Ummmm…..Florida has lots of armed citizens who aren’t going to take kindly to yutes taking to the streets.

    Even Sharpton/Crump/et.al. are already trying to walk this back by telling people that “this trial is NOT about race”….

    Would’ve been nice if they had felt that way back when they decided to agitate their fan base –

There is no way that this judge will toss the case. The defense knows this but has to argue the motion so that when she denies the motion, it can be raised as error on appeal. This is an excellent defense team.

Maybe she will reserve her ruling on the motion for a judgment of acquittal.

Let the defense present its case and let it go to the jury.

Do they have JNOV in Fl?

My new favorite comment:

the screamer doesnt matter omara your client should never have owned a gun, never turned around, never get out of the truck, never assumed a blk male wearing a hoodie walking in the darkness in the rain Martin fought back he wasnt looking for a fight!
by pechilvr 3:29 PM

    caambers in reply to Browndog. | July 5, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    the poster probably votes too. Idiocracy is here. This whole trial has shades of the trial in that movie. Your honor…the de-fen-DANT and that is not cool…NOT COOL…he’s should be like, um…guilty…peace out.

MOM just called the prosecution’s theory ” a fallacy of absurd proportions.”

Couldn’t be more precise.

“A fallacy of absurd proportions!”

Good title for a book.

The facts could be construed to show that GZ started the confrontation, TM got the advantage over GZ, then GZ pulled his gun and gunned him down out of spite, malice and anger rather than a legitimate fear for his life.

(I don’t buy it for a minute but it’s enough to avoid a directed verdict. I think.)

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:41 pm

    No, because GZ was on the phone, walking and distracted with looking for the police to arrive. He’s not looking to engage with TM at all, just to find the address and the police at that point.

      Marco100 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 5, 2013 at 3:49 pm

      At this point all inferences have to be made most favorably to the non-moving party (the State). Which basically means you have to discard anything favorable to GZ and construe anything negative to GZ as negatively as you possibly can.

      Jeantel’s testimony can be construed as meaning that GZ jumped TM.

      The fact that TM got the advantage at some point in their brawl doesn’t mean AS A MATTER OF LAW that the homicide was justifiable.

      Maybe GZ could have escaped/evaded the situation without shooting the gun.

      Maybe GZ could have shot him in a non-fatal area.

      Maybe GZ was exaggerating his fear of TM and the damage TM was inflicting.

      Everything has to be construed to the advantage of the State at this point.

      How long does it take for “ill will” to develop? Maybe GZ had ill will due to his frustration over prior “a holes” who got away?

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 5, 2013 at 4:03 pm

      Mantei is wrong – when there is no other option, killing by a gunshot to the head is no proof of ill-will, spite and hatred.

    styro1 in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    The facts can’t be construed to show that GZ started the confrontation beyond a reasonable doubt. And there are doubts, many in fact.

Uncle Samuel | July 5, 2013 at 3:37 pm

Mark O’Mara is brilliantly decimating (with the help of the prosecution’s witnesses) the narrative of Crump, Corey, de la Rionda, et al.

    Marco100 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 5, 2013 at 3:41 pm

    Nelson will likely say: “Mr. O’Mara aren’t all your arguments really for the jury to decide? don’t they all involved weighing the credibility of the witness testimony? Isn’t that the jury’s job not my job?”

Actually killing someone is sufficient actual (not just circumstantial) evidence of malice of the shooter towards the other person.

If GZ was just partying on the block on New Year’s Eve and popped off a few rounds into the air one of which kills TM then maybe it’s a better argument for an acquittal on the top count.

    Ragspierre in reply to Marco100. | July 5, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    As Andy McCarthy pointed out, the second scenario is a better fit for “depraved mind” murder than the facts the State is trying to use.

Wow. MOM really knows his stuff. I am impressed. I may not be following it all but d@mn he sure seems quite brilliant to me.

Most stupid question of the case : Travon couldn’t have gotten up and done jumping jacks after he was shot could he ?

MOM’s problem is that the evidence “as a whole” is equivocal. It’s not as if every single witness who testified agreed on all the pertinent facts. The jury can pick or choose who to believe and which parts of their testimony to believe or discard.

“The State’s witnesses in that case uniformly identified the victim as the aggressor.”

Not the case here. The precedent cited doesn’t support MOM’s argument here.

Lucien Cordier | July 5, 2013 at 3:44 pm

I’ve noticed on at least two occasions that when the defense requested to approach the bench, Nelson was quite curt, simply barking “NO!”. On several occasions, however, when the prosecution made the same request she responded in a pleasant manner.

My question is not about the obvious bias, but about the rules and protocols governing when the attorneys MAY approach and when the judge MUST ALLOW them to approach.

Would anyone be so kind as to provide a little “Approach the Bench for Dummies”?