Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Zimmerman Trial LIVE VIDEO Day 6 – State’s Witnesses

Zimmerman Trial LIVE VIDEO Day 6 – State’s 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.

During the lunch recess, or immediately thereafter, we will post a mid-day update (not just a list of tweets this time!). 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.

This morning Court is expected to start at 9:00AM.

To see our weekend wrap-upp & reader poll, covering last week’s State’s witness testimony and our exclusive analysis of it, click here:

Zimmerman Trial – Open Comment Forum – Weekend Wrap-Up & Reader Poll

To see our Sunday evening post on the issue of how much injury one must suffer before you can act in lawful self-defense, click here:

Zimmerman Update — How Much Injury Is Required Before Self-Defense is Justified?

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


[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.)

Live Stream Video Alternative


Monday, July 1 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. UPDATE: 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, 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.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


To tmason, rational, johnbartow and all the others on this forum that are adamant about George Zimmerman’s guilt,

It seems many of you think that the reason the folks on this site are rather adamant supporters of George Zimmerman, is that we just don’t care that a young black kid was killed.

We, on the other hand, seem to think that the only reason you folks are supporting Trayvon Martin is because he was black and George is “white”.

So basically, we both seem to think the other group is racist.
I would like to explore this just a bit.

Now you may not believe this to be true, but I can promise you that the vast majority of us on this forum that are supporting George Zimmerman are NOT doing so because of race. If you leave all the evidence of this case exactly as it is, but you make George Zimmerman black and Trayvon white, we would still be supporting the black guy who got attacked by the white kid and had to shoot him in self defense. I absolutely KNOW this statement is true for me.

Now, what I want to know, if you are really honest with yourselves…
Can you say that you would still be so adamantly supporting the white kid who got shot and demanding a conviction for a black George Zimmerman?

In addition to this, I would like to point out that if hard evidence came into this trial that showed George Zimmerman attacked Trayvon and that Trayvon’s beating of Zimmerman was truly in self defense, we would change our views and be supporting a conviction for George Zimmerman. For example, if someone came forward with video that showed George chased down Trayvon, pulled out his gun and ordered Trayvon to freeze. Then Trayvon smashed Zimmerman in the nose, got on top of him and was pummeling his head in an attempt to disarm George, then George finally shot him. Well, we would all be saying that George needs to go to prison for a long time.

You see, we are judging this case based on the evidence shown and the law concerning 2nd degree murder and manslaughter. What are you judging it on?

    Ragspierre in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 9:27 am

    A few observations…

    1. from the beginning, I’ve said this was a garden-variety killing in a small to medium-sized American city

    2. that there are “sides” here, with people as heavily invested in VERY emotional positions is interesting and a shame

    3. “this is a political prosecution”; yeah, duh. Many are, and we have no problem with that…insist on them, in fact. This is how it HAS been, and will be in the future

    4. there has been an AMAAAAAAZING amount of BS published about this, from Da Dersh to extremists on every point of the compass

    5. “Cory abused her discretion”; maybe. We gave her that power…and thousands like her all over America. We often cheer them for the same behavior as against people we like less than Zimmerman, and about whom we never hear. What are we gonna do about it?

      fogflyer in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 9:36 am

      Rags, I honestly don’t get too upset at the general public who think Zimmerman is guilty. As you said, this was a political case, and LOTS of misinformation has been put out there since day one.

      What gets me though is the folks that have found this forum. There is such quality information here and a chance to dispel much of that misinformation if they have an open mind and are willing to look at the evidence and the law. I just don’t know how people on this forum can still be so adamant about Zimmerman’s guilt.

        jmare in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 9:57 am

        I think it comes down to confirmation bias; people see what they want to see.

        Ragspierre in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 11:26 am

        Being as objective and agnostic as I try to be, I have to agree that there is no “there” there in terms of the State’s case. Not so far, anyhow.

        And, as I told people here long ago, O’Mara is good.

        Dick DeGuerin, who is a mythic figure in Texas criminal law, says he likes Zimmerman’s chances, and liked the judge.

        Pettifogger in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 12:27 pm

        It makes you despair of any system designed to get at the truth in a complex matter. People are so invested in their world views that they are impervious to evidence that contradicts that view.

        The primary evidence against Zimmerman is that Trayvon is a member of a minority group that has experienced persecution, that Trayvon looked like a good kid when he was younger, and that Zimmerman can be cast as being other than a member of a minority group that has experienced persecution. Despite being 1/4 African American, Zimmerman looks white so he can be painted as a racist.

        The evidence in favor of Zimmerman is too vast to set out in a comment. The case ought to be a no-brainer. But who the Hell knows?

      Aridog in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 10:43 am

      Ragspierre said: “5. ‘Cory abused her discretion’; maybe. We gave her that power …”

      I understand your basic point, even the “garden variety killing”…which makes the reality unsettling. Corey’s appointment by the Florida Governor to investigate and prosecute this case after the normally vested prosecutor determined not to proceed makes this political only…e.g., “we” did not give Ms Corey any power, the Governor did, essentially to over-rule the regular prosecutors office.

      It is not actual double jeopardy, but it damn close to it. Now we shop for prosecutors, for judges, for venues, an iota short of prejudice.

        Ragspierre in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 11:14 am

        The larger point being the power we vest every day in the hands of prosecutors (who are people, and often politically motivated people) to determine who to grind in the criminal justice system and who to leave alone.

        Like Glenn Reynolds, I think we have erred too much on the side of power. I am not a fan of plea bargains, for instance. I am not a fan of over-charging. I am REALLY not a fan of LEOs who lie under oath, yet I see that fairly commonly.

        I have a very intimate knowledge of a Texas prosecutor who made a very clear, very political point of prosecuting a blond, blue-eyed kid just prior to an election cycle in the most draconian and unjustifiable way. Total cynical politics, straight up.

    I am sympathetic to Trayvon Martin. I have thought this was more tragic than criminal. A series of events that spun out of control and ended up with him dead and Zimmerman facing the wrath of a corrupt criminal and political system.

    This video of Zimmerman re-enacting the crime is pretty amazing (I had not seen it before) Normally the last thing you would want to do is something like this with the cops without a lawyer, but Zimmerman seems credible and sincere. I can see why the local cops did not charge him.

      Fen in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 10:46 am

      Spun out of control?! Bullshit. Who forced Martin to abandon the safety of his home just yards away and go back to confront Zimmerman? Who?

      The only explanation I can find for your willful self-deceit is that you have Guilt for some henious racist act against blacks (bigotry of low expectations?) and so your illogical defense of Martin must be some act of Penance.

        Chill Fen. I believe Martin threw the first punch and was the attacker. He committed a felony right then and there. But he paid for it didn’t he? Teenagers are reckless and stupid, Martin if he did what Zimmerman says was a thug, but he never had the opportunity to learn from this mistake.

        I can understand a kid who thinks he is being followed exploding in anger. That does not mean I condone it or excuse it away. It is still tragic when a 17 year old dies and another man is fighting legally for his life.

          Fen in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 2:15 pm

          But you ARE excusing it, with your “teenage boys are reckless” nonsense. You’re like the idiots that claim 911 was a “tragedy” when it really was a deliberate attack.

          Quit making excuses for a 17 year old. Sure, they make mistakes based on ignorance and inexperience. Deliberate and attempted murder is not one of them.

          creeper in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 2:55 pm

          It IS a tragedy, EBL. The violent death of a young person is always tragic. That doesn’t change the circumstances one whit, which you seem to be acknowledging.

          In the long run, the prosecution of George Zimmerman is an equal tragedy. There is just nothing positive to be found in any of this.

          Fen in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 3:23 pm

          No, a “tragedy” would have been lightning striking Martin dead. Martin was a thug who assaulted and attempted to murder someone for looking at him funny.

          Martin deserved what he got. I’m glad he’s dead.

        Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | July 1, 2013 at 11:19 am

        Having both been a…and having raised…teenage boy(s), the “bigotry of low expectations” is something of a joke.

        It ain’t bigotry to understand that teenage boys do stupid…often lethal…things that in a few years they would never dream of doing.

        That does NOT mean that cause and effect should be suspended WRT them. It just means it is not misplaced to feel pity when something they do causes a tragic effect.

          Immolate in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 11:47 am


          Of course not, but it is hard to prosecute Martin for assault and battery given he is dead. Teenagers, especially teenage boys, sometimes react impulsively and violently. Martin unfortunately choose to attack a guy who ended up shooting him (in self defense). Doesn’t mean I relish Martin being dead (I am sure George Zimmerman feels bad about that too).

          I want to see Zimmerman acquitted because he was not the guy in the wrong.

    moonmoth in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 10:46 am

    I agree with you. Especially with your statement,

    “… if someone came forward with video [or for me (“moonmoth”), at least, any other sort of “beyond reasonable doubt” testimony] that showed George chased down Trayvon, pulled out his gun and ordered Trayvon to freeze. Then Trayvon smashed Zimmerman in the nose, got on top of him and was pummeling his head in an attempt to disarm George, then George finally shot him. Well, we would all be saying that George needs to go to prison for a long time.”

    Like you, I’m by no means willing to give Zimmerman a “pass” just because Trayvon was (as we now know) quite an objectionable character, and because Trayvon was beating the snot out of him. But in view of the evidence that the State’s own witnesses have given, the State has to make, at least, the sort of case you’ve outlined.

    Rational in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 11:48 am

    Please don’t put up straw men and knock them down. I have been asking why Zimmerman thought he was suspicious. I do not know if it is racism, but the reasons given for thinking TM suspicious is suspicious. “It was raining. I didn’t recognize him, He was walking leisurely and looking at the houses”.

    Zimmerman knows everyone, but he doesn’t know the name of the street.

      CT_Concerned_Citizen in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:01 pm

      Zimmerman’s statements in the 911 call to the effect that the guy was standing around in the rain, looking into windows kind of does it for me. When I have to be out in the rain, I am usually hunkered down and focused on getting to where I am going.

        That is not true. It is absolutely not true that GZ said he say TM looking into houses on the 911 tape. He says he was walking leisurely and looking around. That is not the same thing. That is something I do all the time and I don’t expect a big guy in a car to start following me in a manner that might seem menacing. GZ never says that TM left the public paths and roads. Never.

        I listened to the tape and I read 4 transcripts that differ on some points, but not on that.

        That is why I claim you guys live in a bubble. Nothing on the tape claims that TM was casing any house.

          Fabi in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:34 pm

          From NEN call:

          GZ: ‘…looking at all the houses’.

          The transcipts are available, maybe you should read one before you make such a foolish claim.

          KrazyCrackaEsq in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:37 pm

          Already been stipulated that he cut threw someone’s yard on his way back from 7-11.

          Fabi in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:41 pm

          What public paths and roads? All areas, including roads and paths, are private property within that community.

          Rational in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:51 pm

          @Fabi OK, the common spaces. Not the individual property but the common spaces.

          Bruce Hayden in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:23 pm

          Respectfully disagree. According to GZ in his reenactment the next day, he first saw Martin on the lawn between the sidewalk and a townhouse right by one that was recently broken into. It was this, walking around slowly on this front lawn in the rain and wet grass that originally made GZ suspicious. You may be correct that the front lawn is community property, but I suspect not. In any case the people owning that townhouse have a reasonable expectation of privacy from people walking around in their front yard.

          GZ then drove a block or two to the clubhouse, where he pulled in to call the police non-emyergency line to report the incident. While on the phone, Martin apparently walked by, then around GZ’s vehicle, looking in. He then continued on out of GZ’s sight. And, yes, from there on until the lethal end, there is no evidence that Martin actually was ever anywhere he wasn’t entitled to be.

          jayjerome66 in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:39 pm

          The testimony of the police-department woman who helped set up the Neighborhood Watch (not objected to by the state when given) was that TMs behavior that night as described was indeed ‘suspicious.’ Tho GZs ‘suspicions’ proved ungrounded, they were legally, logically, and morally justified. If I see someone, anyone, in my neighborhood who doesn’t look right to me, I can ask them what the hell they’re doing there (which I have done recently, after two break-ins and a dog-napping on my street).

      Marshal in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:02 pm


      I have been asking why Zimmerman thought he was suspicious.

      Why would this matter? Does being suspicious for the wrong reason negate the right to self-defense?

        healthguyfsu in reply to Marshal. | July 1, 2013 at 12:19 pm

        Not sure if you should even bother…this is another weak attempt at crying racism.

          Marshal in reply to healthguyfsu. | July 1, 2013 at 12:32 pm


          I want to see if he’s “rational” enough to understand his own point. He’s arguing elsewhere he’s asking “reasonable” questions without response. What’s missing is evidence he’s considered his own view with anything like as criticial an eye as he casts on others.

          More likely he’s pushing this because it has a vague sense of wrong about it. But he hasn’t actually thought about it enough to understand it doesn’t matter to Zs innocence or guilt, otherwise why focus on an irrelevant issue? When people are grasping at straws they often choose not to inspect those straws particularly closely.

      kcp_here in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:24 pm

      @Rational, the state’s own witness Wendy Dorival who managed the neighborhood watch program for the Sandford PD agreed that TM’s behavior was within the scope of being “suspicious”.

      “Oh, definitely”, answered Dorival, “that’s exactly the kind of behavior we encourage NWP participants to report to the police”…which GZ did.

      On another note…I have lived in my neighborhood for 13 years, I don’t know every street name in my subdivision. Apparently I need to learn them just in case you are ever on a jury judging me, because my ignorance would automatically make me guilty?

        Rational in reply to kcp_here. | July 1, 2013 at 12:37 pm

        Yes, you should learn every street if you are going to claim you know every person. Did someone who was guest need a guest pass to walk through the development; especially if it was raining?

          healthguyfsu in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:58 pm

          The witness from the HOA testified that she did not know the street names either because they are poorly marked and confusing as is common in complexes of this nature.

          Further, it is not a requirement to know the street name in order to report a crime or even suspicious activity. Try again.

          Rational in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:06 pm

          @healthguyfsu Of course, but that was not my point. My point was that GZ could not have known everyone in the complex. For one thing, TM was legally there. GET IT? TM was not trespassing. In GZ’s words, Martin was walking leisurely. Leisurely is not a word I would normally associated with committing a crime.

          ZurichMike in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:18 pm

          How do you know TM had a legal right to be there? Most HOA’s require registration of guests. And even TM were there legally, does that negate the fact that a gangly youth walking slowly in rain at night, looking at houses is *not* suspicious? Or that fact that not one, but two NEN/police dispatchers said that GZ acted correctly in identifying and reporting the suspicious behavior?

          Rational in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:46 pm

          @ZurichMike You summed it up very nicely. “Even if TM was there legally”. That is why this case has become a national cause celebre. “Even if TM was there legally” That is why this has caused such a uproar. That is the point. A black kid goes out for some snacks during the half-time break in an all-star basketball game and he ends up dead.

          Maybe Zimmerman will be acquitted. But the fact that few on this site can see that there is something wrong with this picture is what has caused the outrage.

          A kid cannot ‘leisurely’ walk through a development where he is an invited guest. He cannot react when he is followed by a guy who has not identified himself in any manner. That is procedure? That guy can pursue him in a threatening manner and be armed.

          The only truly inescapable fact is that TM was legally on the premises and he was shot dead by a guy looking for burglars. OK, you say it was not racism. But how many similar stories are there? Why is it almost always a dark skin kid?

          Who was looking for trouble? GZ was literally looking for trouble. GZ found trouble. It just wasn’t the trouble he was tasked with finding.

          kcp_here in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 5:34 pm

          A leisurely walk through a Florida downpour is suspicious whether you know the person or not, or know the street names or not.

      Is it racism when you see a black kid walking through your neighborhood you do not recognize to be suspicious? Sometimes it is not race but the manner the person carries themselves. Youth who are well dressed going door to door for…say…magazine subscriptions are not going to raise the same suspicion (regardless of race) than one walking in the rain acting in a manner you might subjectively believe to be unusual and suspicious. Context matters.

        Ragspierre in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 1:31 pm

        If so, Jesse Jackson is a racist.

        Well, regardless…Jesse Jackson is a racist.

        But you get the point…

        Fen in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 2:19 pm

        Point of order: as proven by Zimmerman’s first call to police, Zimmerman was not sure of Trayvons race.

      fogflyer in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:47 pm

      You have been asking a lot more questions than that… and we have been answering them. However, I can’t seem to get you to answer any of mine.

      I’ll tell you what. I will answer yours, and I will show you where George Zimmerman said Trayvon was looking in windows and was walking off the path (even though you are the only one who seems to think it is particularly relevant) if you do me the courtesy of answering the questions in my first post.

      In addition, I am still waiting for the answers to my last questions of you, which are VERY relevant to the case.

      Who made first contact?
      Who committed the first illegal act?
      What was that illegal act?
      What evidence is there that supports the illegal act was committed?

        Rational in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 1:00 pm

        Who made first contact? Zimmerman and Z pursued as far as the outer perimeter.

        Who committed the first illegal act? We don’t know. We only has GZ’s statement. That may be reasonable doubt, if it cannot be determined. But I don’t know how you can assume it was TM.

        What was that illegal act? Was what an illegal act?
        What evidence is there that supports the illegal act was committed? GZ pursued as far as the outer perimeter. GZ had a gun that was visible in a holster. If TM felt threatened and he was acting in self-defense, GZ may have committed a crime.

          Marshal in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:18 pm

          Rational says

          Who committed the first illegal act? We don’t know. We only have GZ’s statement. That may be reasonable doubt, if it cannot be determined. But I don’t know how you can assume it was TM.

          No one “assumes” it was TM. There is evidence to support that conclusion; there is none to support GZ committing an illegal act.

          What was that illegal act?

          An assault.

          What evidence is there that supports the illegal act was committed?

          GZs testimony supported by both other witnesses and the physical evidence.

          GZ pursued as far as the outer perimeter. GZ had a gun that was visible in a holster. If TM felt threatened and he was acting in self-defense, GZ may have committed a crime.

          Here’s the interesting meat of this comment: “Rational” dismisses the evidence supporting GZ as not conclusive, which is somewhat true depending on the specific accusation, but irrelevant since guilt has to be proven. But here he places his own supposition on the guilty side and claims to be unable to discern a difference between evidence and a story he just made up.

          Why do so many of those arguing for guilt believe if they can invent a single possibility whereby Zimmerman could be guilty that possibility counts as evidence?

          We don’t live in a fictional world. The ability to make up a story that matches the facts is not analysis and conclusions drawn under such process are not legitimate.

          Harry9000 in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:20 pm

          Being armed and following somebody is not a crime and the only one we can be sure of that actually committed a crime was Martin.

          fogflyer in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 3:09 pm

          OK, seeing as you at least gave me a half-hearted attempt at answering my questions, here you go:

          On the walk-thru with officer Serino, George said TWICE that TM was first seen in the grass between the two houses. He even points out the exact spot. Not on a sidewalk. He also says he was just standing there, looking around, checking out the houses.

          So, is this proof that TM was up to no good? Absolutely not!
          Never said it was. All I am saying is that it was not unreasonable for GZ to be suspicious of a guy walking in between houses, off the beaten path, in the rain, in the dark, in an area that has a string of burglaries. I just don’t see what your problem is with that.

          You keep saying we don’t have facts.

          Here is the MOST important fact we have.

          Trayvon Martin beat the crap out of GZ!
          DO you dispute this? Are you still going with the “George on top” fallacy?

          If you agree that Trayvon was the one beating up George, then Trayvon had to have a LEGALLY justifiable reason to do so, which do to the severity of the beating, would basically mean an immediate fear for his life.

          So please, give me one piece of evidence that shows TM had this fear?

          BTW-Running away is not evidence of that. Fear, possibly… fear of great bodily injury or death… no way.

          Rational in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm

          @fogflyer – GZ did not say he was checking out the house in his early statements. He said that TM was walking ‘leisurely’. Besides what does it mean to ‘check out the houses’. Was he looking in windows? No. Was he trying doors? No. He was walking leisurely and looking around. Seems pretty normal to me. I do it sometimes; even in the rain. Why don’t you try walking a mile in Martin’s shoes. He’s feeling pretty good and minding his own business. Then some guy is eyeballing him. Think it was the first time?

          I still want to know what street sign Zimmerman thought he would find walking up that dark lane? It makes a lot more sense that he was trying to follow Martin. The detective didn’t think Zimmerman was innocent. He just thought Manslaughter was appropriate. IThe state over-charged. I didn’t know this, but apparently there are no lesser included charges. So Zimmerman will walk. But he isn’t innocent. He stalked a kid, provoked a fight. When he was losing, he killed him. Yeah, he really didn’t know if he had hit him. Trayvon said ‘you got me’ and then took a nap.

      Bruce Hayden in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:33 pm

      I think that you need to watch the GZ reenactment video over at GretaWire. GZ explains all this. He initially got suspicious of a n unknown person (esp with his hood up) slowly walking around on the front lawn of a Townhouse in the rain and wet grass. He was apparently between the house and sidewalk on the wet grass. This was right by another townhouse that had been broken into very recently. So, yes, GZ did not see Martin looking into the windows. But, I suspect that most of us here who saw what GZ claims to have seen that night, would have been suspicious of Martin. The difference though is that GZ acted on his suspicion, calling the police.

      Pettifogger in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 2:54 pm

      I have walked in a leisurely manner and looked at houses. Assume for the sake of argument that the reason I was not challenged is that I am white. Even so, had I been challenged, I would have spoken civilly with whoever came up. I would not have run away, and I would not have tried to punch anybody.

      So even if you assume that Zimmerman’s suspicions were racially based (an unlikely assumption given his own African-American heritage), that only gets you so far. Trayvon need not have run initially and need not have waylaid Zimmerman later. Chalk it up, if you will, to immaturity. In that case, this is a tragic event, but not murder. Whatever the basis of Zimmerman’s initial suspicions, he was still legally entitled to defend himself when attacked.

    inspectorudy in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 12:05 pm

    I agree with all of your comments except the part where you say if “Zimmerman chased Martin down with his gun drawn and then yelled freeze” we would agree that Zimmerman should be found guilty. It defies all common sense to imagine that Martin socked Zimmerman in the nose with a drawn gun in his face. Also, at that point Zimmerman is knocked to the ground, being beaten and his head bashed on the concrete. Allowing for some time for this to take place what has happened to the gun and why would it take so long for Z to respond? Why wouldn’t Martin have gone for the gun? Would any sane person start to beat the person holding a gun on them and not try to take the gun away? No matter how you slant the story there is no rational explanation for the event except Zimmerman’s.

      Rational in reply to inspectorudy. | July 1, 2013 at 12:46 pm

      I didn’t bring this up. But suppose one fact is different in the narrative that GZ wrote. Suppose his gun was drawn. Then TM’s actions would make perfect sense. He would be fighting for his life. He is going to smash Martin’s head, grab for the gun and do anything to stop from getting shot.

      I understand that that is not evidence. But since you are speculating on it, I thought I could, too.

        fogflyer in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:12 pm

        Did you read my first post?
        The very first post on this page.
        I clearly state that if it could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ pulled a gun on Trayvon, and Trayvon then pummeled GZ in an attempt to disarm him, that I, and probably most everyone else on here, would think George was guilty of a crime and should go to prison.

        See, maybe I am not as biased as you think?

        inspectorudy in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 2:12 pm

        Rational, you are not reading the comments or you are so biased that you cannot comprehend them. Have you ever known anyone who had a gun directly aimed at them in the dark of night to attack the gunman when the gunman’s intent is not known? If I saw an unidentified person in my backyard at night during a heavy downpour, I might logically aim a gun at him while I found out why he was there. Did Z foolishly say “I’m gonna shoot you suka”? How can you twist reality to come up with such absurd scenarios?

        Fen in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 2:22 pm

        Rational, you’re just kind of stupid aren’t you? That’s the reason for the ironic screen name, to declare you are “rational” in advance of your irrational comments?

      That seems unlikely. And if Zimmerman pulled a gun on Martin first, chances are Martin would not attack him. The other alternative is far more likely, Martin attacks Zimmerman not realizing he had a gun…and ends up being shot.

      fogflyer in reply to inspectorudy. | July 1, 2013 at 12:54 pm

      Oh, I agree.
      I was not in any way trying to say that is a likely scenario, or even plausible. It was simply the only scenario I could think of that would make George guilty.

      That is why I said if someone produced a video showing that it went down like this. Without an actual video, I don’t think I could be convinced that such an unbelievable situation actually took place.

    JohnC in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    Some people seem to think many posting here are racist because they don’t seem to care that a young black man was shot dead by an older ‘white’ man.
    Well, you’re right. We don’t care that the person who was shot and killed was a young black man. But guess what? We also don’t care that the guy who did the shooting was ‘white.’ If a young white man had acted in the same manner we believe TM acted and wound up shot by a black GZ we would still believe that a black GZ should never have been charged.
    WE are the ones who are NOT being racist. You see, we actually don’t care about the race of either man. All that matters is their actions.

    LXIXTIME in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 12:57 pm

    Can anyone HELP ME? ….Trying to see for myself the original interview/deposition of Rachel Jeantel – Dee Dee by Bernie De La Rhonda that was conducted in the home of one of the Martin family members. I’ve accessed the Egnyte doccument site per the Jacksonville State Prosecutors offices advice, but I doubt the actual interview by Bernie De La Rhonda that pretty much resulted in Zimmerman being charged is there.

    tbrew85 in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    When I first heard of this case, I believed the media reports and assumed GZ was guilty and should go to jail for a very long time. As time went on, and actual evidence has been made known, it is very, very obvious that GZ is a totally innocent man being persecuted by the media and the system that brought purely political charges.

    Harry9000 in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    Do I think Zimmerman is innocent out of personal racial bias? In part yes. The evidence and the trial so far seems to back Zimmerman’s claim of self defense so I feel my personal belief on his innocence to be valid yet, yes, race does have something to do with what I think about this issue. It wasn’t that way from the start. Taking the media’s word for it, I thought Zimmerman’s goose was cooked and that Sanford PD made a huge mistake in not charging him at the outset. Then slowly the facts emerged…and I knew I was being hood-winked once again and that the bias involved with that was race, and from there re-ignited my own racial bias concerning this case.
    Incidents like this and the Duke LaCrosse persecution will continue to shape that bias and I will be less likely to take any future incidents of “hate crime” seriously.

    tmason in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 4:53 pm

    You see, we are judging this case based on the evidence shown and the law concerning 2nd degree murder and manslaughter. What are you judging it on?

    We are also judging it on the evidence.

    You must understand that the initial outrage stemmed from the fact that George Zimmerman was not arrested after a simple Q&A session from police when #1. the victim was unarmed, #2. doing nothing illegal, and #3. the person killing that human being admitted to this killing while simply verbally claiming self defense.

    This story wouldn’t even have been on the news had the Sanford Police Department made an arrest and then did a full investigation afterwards (regardless of outcome).

    You miss the context entirely; a 17 year old is shot walking home, doing nothing illegal by everyone’s admission (except GZ of course, who has the biggest reason in the world to lie) and he gets to claim self-defense because he has a few injuries on him? We don’t at least make an arrest based on the obvious probable cause and let an investigation happen?

    That is where all of the outrage stems from.

    As for the trial, time will tell but the evidence is starting to stack up against GZ. You have his obvious lies on record (him saying he wasn’t following when he clearly was, he even says it clearly on the non-emergency dispatch).

    We are far from done…

      Matt in FL in reply to tmason. | July 1, 2013 at 5:02 pm

      tmason sez: “This story wouldn’t even have been on the news had the Sanford Police Department made an arrest and then did a full investigation afterwards (regardless of outcome).”

      You cannot “just arrest” someone who claims self defense because you want to. You can only do that if they determine “that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.” Fl. Stat. 776.032(2) Otherwise they may not arrest the person. They clearly did not feel that there was PC.

Be careful, you may force them to take a long look at themselves and their motivations and they may not like what they see. that being said, I completely agree with your perception of these things but hope they can somehow prove us wrong.

    Fen in reply to Nick. | July 1, 2013 at 9:50 am

    My experience is that they don’t react that way. You can rub their noses in their racism and hypocrisy and they will simply pivot to whatever argument maintaings their commitment and consistency

      Rational in reply to Fen. | July 1, 2013 at 12:10 pm

      You guys live in a bubble. I ask reasonable questions and you decide I am biased. OK, believe what you want. The bubble may be comforting, but it is not reality.

      All I have done is ask questions. Yes, I have doubts about Zimmerman’s story. There are obvious holes in it and some of the police thought so. The problem is that most of the people on this site have absolutely no doubt that Zimmerman acted impeccably. GZ may or may not have committed a crime, but it is beyond dispute that he precipitated the incident and a kid is dead. The kid was far from perfect, but he was not in the process of committing a crime at that time. Say what you will, but no one has produced evidence that TM was casing the place or breaking in to a place. He was a lawful visitor; even if GZ didn’t recognize him. He was strolling and talking on the phone. He didn’t have a care in the world.

      So my question is why is he TM dead? OK, it was not racism. Was it wearing a hoodie? What was it that led GZ to piss this kid off enough that a fight ensued? Maybe TM felt threatened, when after running and hiding behind a building, Zimmerman is still on his tail. Maybe TM is not circling back, but resuming his walk after thinking he lost GZ and finds Zimmerman is still following him. Maybe TM was hiding behind a bush to get away and GZ came up on him? Maybe TM finally decided to stand his ground. Maybe?

        Matt in FL in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:20 pm

        @Rational sez: “GZ may or may not have committed a crime, but it is beyond dispute that he precipitated the incident and a kid is dead.”

        So that means what? Hang him high? You’re missing the very important interim period. Did GZ precipitate the whole thing by being suspicious? Sure. If he’d kept driving, none of it would have happened. But that’s completely irrelevant. The important part, that you left out, was, y’know, EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAPPENED. You’re saying that alfkdajfasdfa… and I just lost interest in arguing with you.

          inicnam507 in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 1:49 pm

          Yeah, That is like saying if Dad was home with trademark this would’ve all been avoided but for some reason dad didn’t notice him missing until the next morning. I still wonder how Dad didn’t know he wasn’t have that night when he got home

        healthguyfsu in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:25 pm

        Aggressive teenagers don’t need a reason. You are asking questions out of the current scope of the trial because both sides of the case do not want to see Trayvon’s character assassinated in court. He’s already dead and his grieving parents are sitting in the front row.

        There is quite a bit of material being left out of the case for good reason (almost by mutual decision). It is not “rational” to bias your questions in such a way that only Trayvon is assumed innocent…each one of your questions assumes just that and its not how our society works.

        PackerBronco in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 12:32 pm

        The problem is that most of the people on this site have absolutely no doubt that Zimmerman acted impeccably. GZ may or may not have committed a crime, but it is beyond dispute that he precipitated the incident and a kid is dead.
        We’re not claiming that GZ is INNOCENT beyond a reasonable doubt, we’re simply arguing that, at this point, he sure doesn’t seem to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

        As for precipitating the incident: what incident are you talking about? Simply following Martin need not result in this tragedy. The incident that really put this tragedy in motion is the fight.

        Okay, so who precipitated THAT incident? Who threw the first punch? Do you know?

        Goetz von Berlichingen in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 1:41 pm

        Trayvon is dead because he chose to assault a man instead of going home.

        Trayvon is dead because he had poor parenting.

        Trayvon is dead because society won’t honestly address the problem that, roughly, 6% of the population commits over 50% of the violent crimes.

        Trayvon is dead because he comes from a culture where learning and education are frowned upon, overt racism is glorified, and personal responsibility is minimized.

        inspectorudy in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 2:14 pm

        Please tell us the “Obvious” holes in Z’s story and the police version.

        Fen in reply to Rational. | July 1, 2013 at 2:36 pm

        Rational: “is beyond dispute that he precipitated the incident and a kid is dead.”

        No, its not. And you really need to get away from argument by assertion. Kinda like your screen name – you chose it to assert you are rational, because you knew you were incapable of demonstating rationality yourself.

        “So my question is why is he TM dead?”

        Martin is dead because he assaulted someone and threatened to murder them.

I really like Dr. Nakasone. This guy is truly an expert in his field. When you listen to his testimony vs the other voice analysis you really see the difference in professionalism and knowledge of the subject.

So, is the State’s plan just to call all of the defense witnesses and hope that because they called them, the jury will somehow think their testimony must have supported their case somehow?

I say this somewhat in jest, but I actually think there may be some truth there.

    DrKyleJones in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 11:40 am

    You’ll probably have noticed they also have tried vigorously to impeach several of them upon re-direct. I thought at the time that the strategy you suggest might have had something to do with it.

Is it possible that the State called Dr. Nakasone in an effort to confuse and frustrate the jury early in the day? I’m a smart guy, but I really have to pay attention to keep track of what he’s saying, and not tune him out into background noise as his answers get longer and longer.

I’m curious to see if they follow Dr. Nakasone immediately with Sybrina Fulton, to try to play into the juror’s sympathies, because “a mother knows her baby’s voice, even if an expert does not.”

    fogflyer in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 9:51 am

    Yeah, I think you are correct… Mom is coming up next.

    But, will they call Dad too?
    He originally said the voice was NOT Trayvon’s, before he did his flip flop.
    Zimmerman’s parents however both identified the voice as George’s immediately.

    So, if Tracy Martin (dad) is not called, will the defense still be able to call him or somehow get in the evidence that he said it was not Trayvon screaming?

      Matt in FL in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 9:55 am

      I think if the State doesn’t call Tracy Martin, the defense probably will. His flip-flopping on identification won’t have as much impact in that case, though, because it will be at such a large temporal remove from Sybrina saying “That’s my baby.”

        Uncle Samuel in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 10:19 am

        Not sure Sybrina was all that much of a mother. From age 3-15, Trayvon was raised by a stepmother named Alice, not Sybrina Fulton.

        Tracy Martin arranged for Trayvon to be transferred back to his birth mother’s custody when he got involved with Brandi two years before his second divorce.

        The Martins are not as clean and simple as the Crump and Parks sanitized narrative would have you believe.

          fogflyer in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 1, 2013 at 11:00 am

          Yeah, I am hoping that comes into play.
          Seeing as we will have dueling parents, with all of them claiming it is their son screaming. I would hammer home the point that the Zimmerman’s have spent a lot more time with George, than the Martins spent with Trayvon.

          Really though, I think this will not be that relevant. All parents claiming it is their son, so call it a wash… So,what else do we have to figure out who was screaming? Maybe the eyewitness who says it was George? Maybe the fact that common sense tells you the guy getting the crap beat out of him was screaming?

        inspectorudy in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 12:10 pm

        Maybe Tracy Martin can explain to the court what “Wet grass” sounds like also. If I were the defense I would have a long list of the exact recording of the “Help” words being screamed over and over made by different people of different ages to see if the Mom can identify TM’s voice from the others. How many times has the mother heard her son scream for his life? If she has then she should explain the situations to help us understand TM’s life style..

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 11:07 am

      If either or both of the parents are going to be called, what are they doing sitting inthe courtroom?

      Why in hell can’t George’s family be there?

        Just a quirk of the law.
        Parents of the deceased are allowed to be in court even if they are witnesses. George’s parents are not. They fought over this a bit before trial.

          Ragspierre in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 11:32 am

          Just to step up…

          My surmise, analogizing from Texas civil rules, that the Martin parents would not testify because they were not excluded was WRONG.

      MarkS in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 12:58 pm

      Martin’s parents are allowed in the court during proceedings and Z’s are not the reason given is they’re potential witnesses. Are witnesses allowed to hear prior testimony before testifying?

        Matt in FL in reply to MarkS. | July 1, 2013 at 1:01 pm

        As a general rule, no, witnesses are not allowed to hear other witness testimony. Exceptions are made for parents of minor children (such as TM’s parents) and also for court-acknowledged experts, I believe. There are also a couple other exceptions, but the rule is no.

        Zimmerman Trial: Why Can Martin’s Parents Stay in Courtroom, But Zimmerman’s Family Can’t? FL Law Explained

        –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

    rotate in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 11:45 am

    TM was raised by another women, not the Dad’s now girlfriend. She is hopping upset about having raised him from age 3 always being there for him and now treated as if she has no place here. She said MOM was not in TM’s life much. So how can she ID screams when he spent most of his life with this step mom? If this Mom has to have experience with his screaming in terror situations she wasn’t around much apparently.

Mister Natural | July 1, 2013 at 9:38 am

prosecution asks what can discerned about the age of person related to age?
expert says it’s very difficult to determine and not possible in this case.
whose witness is this, anyway?

    Mister Natural in reply to Mister Natural. | July 1, 2013 at 9:46 am

    Oops! her’s my edited version
    prosecution asks what can be discerned about the age of person related to voice?
    expert says it’s very difficult to determine and not possible in this case.
    whose witness is this, anyway?

    This expert witness is a defense witness. The state called him as strategy so that it will appear to the jury that the state isn’t “hiding” anything and also to remove some of the impact from the defense’s presentation. IMO, it’s pathetic. The state’s got nothing.

    Estragon in reply to Mister Natural. | July 1, 2013 at 2:12 pm

    If they want to argue the screams are Trayvon’s they have to at least have an expert say you can’t tell, and the “experts” the state lined up have been rather brutally debunked.

    Nakesone was probably only going to be used by the defense as a rebuttal witness if the state’s guys testified, since all direct evidence points to Zimmerman as the one yelling.

Cowboy Curtis | July 1, 2013 at 9:38 am

For whatever its worth, I’m down here in Central FL, and I can tell you, of all the local networks, WOFL Fox 35 has it all over the rest so far as legal commentary goes. The latino lawyer that’s on in the afternoons giving analysis on channel 6 news is pretty damn solid, but on the whole, I’d give the win to Fox 35. Its streaming online. Perhaps a stream adjustment for the site is in order?

    JasonI in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | July 1, 2013 at 9:46 am

    That would be great because the NBC9 talking head may as well be Baghdad Bob.

    Matt in FL in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | July 1, 2013 at 9:51 am

    Eh, I’m watching the live feed without commentary anyway. The WFTV 9 legal commentator is only slightly less useless than every other one I’ve seen anywhere else. Also, they have a nasty habit of talking over things in the courtroom. They never miss a chance to talk over a sidebar, which usually means they keep talking even when the sound comes back on, and overlap the court proceedings by as much as 20-25 seconds. I don’t care, not even a little bit, what those guys have to say; I want to hear the court proceedings.

I am coming of the opinion that all is not as it seems in the trial. I have been avidly following the trial and have probably viewed 80% of the trial live and watched/read synopsis of the rest. I am also very aware of much of the evidence and information that we will never see in trial – like the police interviews and GZ’s videotaped walk-through. The fact that this is a CCW case and the ongoing media bias and ignorance is what caught my attention.

So, here is my analysis… It is common knowledge that the state was pressured to charge GZ even though they fully believed that the best case they could POSSIBLY make would be manslaughter. Time and time again the prosecution has called as their witness folks whose testimony is almost entirely supportive of GZ. I understand many have criticized the prosecution team and pointed out how terribly they are doing. I am now of the opinion that they are doing what they must as professionals, but they ‘know’ GZ is not guilty and are being assistive towards a just verdict.

Presently Dr. Nakasone is called by the prosecution and is destroying any future testimony that the person screaming in the background of the 911 recording be attributed to TM. Even though this will not allow it to be determined as GZ, this will clearly support the reasonable doubt about who it is and almost any reasonable doubt will ultimately support GZ’s claim of self defense. This is one of many examples where the prosecution has weakened its own case on direct from its own witness.

    Cowboy Curtis in reply to MiklRngr. | July 1, 2013 at 10:09 am

    I’m a lawyer down here in FL, and I think you give the prosecution way too much credit. Fighting tooth and nail to keep those color pictures of GZ’s bloodied nose away from the defense, giving them only black and white copies that hid the blood, proves it so far as I’m concerned. I think the special prosecutor saw a potential route to the governor or AG’s office, and ran with it. She bypassed the grand jury for a reason- given the evidence on hand, they probably weren’t going to indict. If she wanted him to get off, she could send it to them, let they refuse to indict, and lay the blame on them. Or she could have declined charges, which she didn’t. The only reason to bypass the grand jury is because she wanted to prosecute the case. The fact that she did the fawning press conference with/about the Martin family shows just where her sympathies were. I think the prosecuting trial attorney saw a way to get famous, write a book, and maybe run for office or get a tv show.

    rantbot in reply to MiklRngr. | July 1, 2013 at 10:58 am

    “I am now of the opinion that they are doing what they must as professionals, but they ‘know’ GZ is not guilty and are being assistive towards a just verdict.”

    Pursuing 2nd degree charges against a man they strongly suspect is innocent is not a mere administrative detail. If your speculation is actually their strategy, then they’ve already failed as professionals as well as decent citizens.

    Theories like this bring to mind Spencer Tracey and Burt Lancaster in “Judgement at Nuremberg” –

    “Those people, those millions of people… I never knew it would come to that.”

    “Herr Janning, it ‘came to that’ the first time you sentenced a man to death you knew to be innocent.”

    Sure, it was just a movie…

      MiklRngr in reply to rantbot. | July 1, 2013 at 4:26 pm

      I believe you extrapolated a bit much “Nuemburg’ing” my opinion. I am not an attorney, but do have some experience as a federal law enforcement agent. That said, I assume that BDLR is ASSIGNED his cases. While I am sure he could resign his position, I would rather have a prosecutor who acts much the same as this one has. GZ has testified at least 4 separate times since my original post – interviews, interrogations, the reenactment, etc. Serino’s actual interrogation would have been sufficient … Everything else was overly supportive towards GZ’s statements. If my opinion is correct, I do not equate BDLR to a Nazi. Unless the Nazi is using his position to minimize the evil.

rabid wombat | July 1, 2013 at 9:46 am

Off topic – other than the Judge’s instruction to the Jury, how does the relevant portions of self defence get communicated to the Jury? If the Prosecution is playing “Zimmerman was not beaten enough to shoot Trayvon” card, how is the point of imminent threat (as well as the other legal pieces of self defense) communicated? I would guess that if the Judge fails in proper instruction, this would be ripe for appeal?

Thanks in advance

I’m just curious if ANYONE is choosing the NBC stream over the pure one. Haven’t looked at it, but am assuming NBC is filtering and spinning when the msm narrative fails

    Matt in FL in reply to Fen. | July 1, 2013 at 9:53 am

    What little I’ve watched of the NBC commentator stream (like when the pure feed went out for about a half hour on Friday), they’re not cutting and and filtering or anything like that. It’s a true feed. The problems I had were first that they have a tendency to keep talking when court comes back in session (like a radio DJ talking over the beginning of your favorite song), and that the NBC legal commentator’s conclusions are often completely wack.

    Aridog in reply to Fen. | July 1, 2013 at 11:05 am

    No idea…the linked live feed here does not work for me.

Is it also possible that some of use might want to listen to the complete testimony without the commentary and the constance commercial interruptions? Looking for the technical details of the experts on both sides to make our own determination on his degree of guilt or innocence.

Mister Natural | July 1, 2013 at 9:58 am

expert just delivered BDLR the knockout blow,IMHO. States that he has been receiving e-mails from colleagues across the globe that agree that their is NO VALIDITY to reaching conclusions from screaming voices.
did i hear that right?

    fogflyer in reply to Mister Natural. | July 1, 2013 at 10:12 am

    I don’t think it is a big deal though.
    The judge already delivered the knock out blow by not allowing the states quack “experts” to testify.
    The jury doesn’t know there ever were experts to testify that is “probably wasn’t George screaming”‘, so really all this witness is good for is saying people close to someone can identify their voice even in stressed situations.

Boy, after emphatically stating all along that the court would not allow speaking objections, that was an extraordinarily long speaking objection that Judge Nelson just allowed Mr. Mantei to make.

Why would TM have been screaming for 45 seconds? What would GZ have been doing to him when GZ is the one with injuries (whatever their severity)?

    WilliamJD in reply to willow. | July 1, 2013 at 12:28 pm

    I guess the argument would be that he was pointing a gun at him. But in that case, Trayvon wouldn’t have yelled help; he’d have yelled, “don’t shoot” or something along those lines, I suppose.

Something has bothered me for the entire weekend…. DeeDee/ Rachel/ Jeantel testified that TM spoke to GZ first. Shouldn’t that be taken as evidence that TM initiated the confrontation/ contact with GZ? If I pass someone on a sidewalk and no words are spoken, there is no contact. If I speak to the other person first, is that not the initiation of that contact? If this is pointed out, the “stalking”/ “afraid” claim by TM supporters becomes moot.

    willow in reply to Storybec. | July 1, 2013 at 10:23 am

    I thought the same. Also, when did she say he was by his daddy’s house? Right before that initiation? I don’t understand how the confrontation could have occurred then because the shooting occurred at a different location.

      txantimedia in reply to willow. | July 1, 2013 at 12:24 pm

      Willow, the timing of the “right by his daddy’s house” comment is about 2 minutes prior to the confrontation. More than enough time for TM to run back up the T, hide and wait to confront GZ.

    rantbot in reply to Storybec. | July 1, 2013 at 11:13 am

    Why would “contact” be of relevance? “Contact” is a loooong way from “launches deadly physical assault”. A lost waif asking for directions makes “contact”. Jehovah’s Witnesses peddling pre-packaged faith make “contact”. Autograph hounds who mistake you for a celeb make “contact”.

    Annoying, perhaps, but nobody would consider that reason to consider forcible self-defense.

      Estragon in reply to rantbot. | July 1, 2013 at 2:19 pm

      It is relevant to rebut the unsubstantiated charge of the apologists here that Zimmerman was “stalking” Martin.

      The fact is the only evidence presented shows Martin at his father’s place before he goes back to confront Zimmerman. If he were afraid or being “stalked,” he could have just gone inside.

        Storybec in reply to Estragon. | July 1, 2013 at 5:56 pm

        Exactly. If you’re “afraid” and being “stalked” you go to a safe haven and call the cops. You report the “creepy-ass cracker” stalking you.

OnTheLeftCoast | July 1, 2013 at 10:30 am

If GZ hadn’t been charged at all, which initially looked plausible, the inevitable civil suit from TM’s family would have been much more difficult, not to mention the civil rights case the DOJ is likely to file. As it is now, lawsuit or civil rights charges or both will keep the thing going so that politicians can wave the bloody shirt.

West’s cross is pathetic, as are all his crosses. He is spending way to much time on a non-contested issue. The expert has said innumerable times that the recording is not suitable for scientific voice analysis about the identity of the yeller. Given the judge’s earlier ruling, no witness is going to testify the an scientific identification can be made from the recording. The big problem for the defense is the mother is going say she recognizes the voice as that of the son. I presume West’s subtle strategy is to put the jury top seep so they miss that upcoming testimony.

Mr Branca: I would be interested in your knowledge of the case in a specific aspect of what I’ve read and heard.

Rachel testified that at one point Trayvon said he was in or near his father’s girlfriend’s backyard.

Did she say that she THOUGHT he was there, or did she say that TRAYVON TOLD her he was there.

I think you pointed out that this was a big point, but I have not been able to find the video which shows her saying that he TOLD her that is where he was.

If that is the case, it’s another nail in the prosecution’s coffin, as he was in safe territory and went back out…to find George again?

The questions of West end up bolstering the ability of a person who is familiar with a voice to identify the speaker: like Martin’s mother. What a disaster.

    DrKyleJones in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 11:50 am

    Yep, a disaster, there’s no way he could get off now. Now everyone will believe that TM was the one calling for help (presumably for help in beating GZ face in).

    fogflyer in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 12:36 pm

    OK, now I am seriously starting to question if you are actually an attorney and if you have any familiarity with the evidence in this case.

    Do you not realize that Zimmerman’s parents also identified the screaming as George?

    Do you not realize that Trayvon’s dad original said the screaming was NOT Trayvon?

    Did you not understand the very important points that West brought out from the FBI witness regarding bias?

    Do you realize the Trayvon’s mom was in a room with a group of people when she was asked to identify the screaming, and therefore, according to expert testimony, is more suspect to be biased?

    I have defended some of your statements in the past, but I am done.
    To quote an elegant speaker I once heard,
    “That is retarded, sir”

      Uncle Samuel in reply to fogflyer. | July 1, 2013 at 1:29 pm

      Horton and Mason are Crump and Parks operatives, trying to promote the false narrative built by Crump and co. in the beginning and spread by mindless leftist race-mongers across the nation to promote this young thug’s supposed victimhood and get their Massah Obama elected.

TM’s father first claimed the voice wasn’t that of his son’s. The Zimmerman parents claimed the voice was their son. The mom’s testimony was going to come in anyways in some fashion.

    rhorton1 in reply to willow. | July 1, 2013 at 10:50 am

    That does not excuse bad lawyering.

      txantimedia in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 12:25 pm

      says the resident house expert….

      Uncle Samuel in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 1:41 pm

      The real bad lawyering has been on the part of Crump and Chump (Ms. Corey) and both will certainly come to regret and suffer the consequences of their actions.

      Attorney General Pam Bondi acted wrongly and so did Obama for politicizing this case. They are both lawyers and should know better. But it was an election year and they are politicians first.

kentuckyliz | July 1, 2013 at 10:55 am

I think this complicated line of questioning is aimed at using Nakasone to elevate the credibility of Good’s testimony over Sabrina’s. Good didn’t know TM & GZ but he was there, looking and listening, and the only one to step outside during the struggle. Everyone else heard through walls and windows and hid. Good was precise in describing his perceptions of how he knew the cries for help came from the man on the ground, facing him. TM was facing away from him at that moment. No echo off the back wall. Good’s perceptions should carry the most weight, even over family members who claim to know what TM and GZ sound like when under severe stress and screaming. (Their machismo cultures may not allow such a behavior–what if this was a unique vocal event?)

    Wolverine in reply to kentuckyliz. | July 1, 2013 at 4:01 pm

    Good also testified that the screams he heard live sounded much different than the screams on the 911 tape.

Martin’s mother apparently will testify that she has heard her son yell loudly in the past thereby increasing her ability to recognize his voice as the screamer on the recoding. The defense is expected to call one or more people to identify the voice as that of Zimmerman. I wonder if those defense witnesses were deposed by the State on the issue of whether they previously heard Zimmerman scream

    kentuckyliz in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 11:05 am

    I would be amused at the irony if the MMA gym trainer guy testifies that he knows it’s GZ screaming, because he heard that from him when sparring…and that’s why he decided to never put him in the ring. LOL

    Pauldd in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 11:27 am

    We will have to see how well Travon’s mother’s testimony holds up. There are obvious issues of bias. Also, while she may know Travon’s voice, she has no knowledge of Zimmerman’s voice, which is necessary to rule him out.

    I think Good’s testimony, along with the physical evidence of Zimmerman’s injuries, is likely much more convincing evidence of who was screaming in distress. It is almost inconceivable to me that Travon’s mother’s testimony can establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Travon was the one screaming.

      Ragspierre in reply to Pauldd. | July 1, 2013 at 11:50 am

      Wonderfully salient point about the relative injuries on the two.

      No bruising even on young Martin that I recall from the autopsy. Certainly nothing supporting the idea he had been hit with a fist.

        Pauldd in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 12:08 pm

        I would anticipate that the state will argue that the screams were coming from Travon because he saw a drawn gun and knew he needed help. The lack of injuries on Travon would be consistent with this theory. You then have Zimmerman with a gun drawn and Travon yelling for help. This goes on for some period suggesting that Zimmerman then shot an unarmed man who was yelling for help. This would support the states theory of a “depraved” state of mind.

        I think this argument is weak at this point. Without compelling evidence that Travon was yelling for help, the theory doesn’t work. Hence, the importance of the Judge’s pre-trial ruling on the scientific evidence. In my view, the strong weight of the evidence supports the position that Zimmerman was yelling for help–his physical injuries and Good’s highly credible testimony.

        Although weak, this theory, however, might help the state survive a motion to dismiss the murder two count at the close of the state’s case. At that point, the judge most view the evidence and the inferences that can be drawn from the evidence in the light most favorable to the state.

          fogflyer in reply to Pauldd. | July 1, 2013 at 1:33 pm

          He..he… That’s funny!
          I posted something earlier stating mostly the same thing.
          The only way Trayvon is justified in beating the crap out of GZ is if GZ drew his weapon in an effort to detain him or something.

          The problem is, if the state was going that route, they should have been the ones arguing that TM DID touch the gun and that the DNA evidence of that was washed away by the rain or improperly handled. There is no question that there was a struggle lasting nearly a minute, so if George had his gun out, Trayvon would have had to have his hands on it trying to disarm him.

          That is the exact opposite of what was argued though 🙂

          Bruce Hayden in reply to Pauldd. | July 1, 2013 at 1:50 pm

          The problem with the 2nd degree murder charge is the depraved mind requirement. It is essentially based on a claimed racial animas by GZ of young black males, and this in turn is based primarily on what GZ said when asked to identify the suspicious person who turned out to be Martin. But everyone has now heard the call, and the person at the other end has said that it didn’t sound racist. And that is before GZ’s own racial background is brought out by the defense, that he has blacks in his family, etc. right now, I think it may be less than likely that the jury gets the 2nd degree instruction. But they are likely to get the manslaughter instruction, which is similar, except missing the depraved mind element. We shall see.

          rhorton1 in reply to Pauldd. | July 1, 2013 at 2:48 pm

          I agree that this is how the prosecution will overcome a directed verdict on Murder II.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Pauldd. | July 1, 2013 at 1:43 pm

      Experts have told us that cell phones are different than landline phones and their distortion of voice frequencies is greater.

      It is futile and foolish to try to identify the screams except for witness on the scene.

    Voluble in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 1:41 pm

    I am more interested in the father’s testimony. He said it was not his son and that was an admission against interest. Trayvon’s parents will cancel each other out before you even get to Zimmerman’s relatives.

kentuckyliz | July 1, 2013 at 11:03 am

I trust and hope that the jury will perceive the self-interest in each family claiming it was their guy screaming. If the TM mom and/or dad testify, can they be questioned about the HOA lawsuit and the money they got? And how a criminal case made that happen? Is there any way to introduce their financial motivations?

    Pauldd in reply to kentuckyliz. | July 1, 2013 at 11:19 am

    Question asked: “If the TM mom and/or dad testify, can they be questioned about the HOA lawsuit and the money they got? And how a criminal case made that happen? Is there any way to introduce their financial motivations?”

    Absolutely admissible cross-x! But this needs to be handled carefully. Defense does not want to be perceived as attacking grieving parent and does not want to leave the impression that the HOA settled because it perceived Zimmerman was guilty.

legacyrepublican | July 1, 2013 at 11:09 am


Last night after reading one of your posts, I went to the Ace of Spades site and saw the video of GZ walking the investigators through the events that happened at the actual location.

I notice in the police recorded video that GZ mentions a previous call to the non-emergency line about the house that Travon was standing in front of the night of the fatal shooting.

If they play that recording, don’t they open it up that they can show this video to the jury?

And if they show this video to the jury, which contains the total of GZ’s testimony on the matter, doesn’t that mean they don’t need to call GZ to the stand in his defense?

That would be nice.

    legacyrepublican in reply to legacyrepublican. | July 1, 2013 at 11:54 am

    Oh well. After listening to Singleton’s testimony, this question is bit moot.

    Voluble in reply to legacyrepublican. | July 1, 2013 at 1:36 pm

    IANALTG but I don’t see how they can admit one and not the other.

    The last thing the prosecution should have done was admit Zimmerman’s version of events in any way. The only chance they had of winning was to make it somehow necessary for George to take the stand and then rattle him somehow. That was it. By getting his version out without him having to testify they give up that avenue of winning.

      legacyrepublican in reply to Voluble. | July 1, 2013 at 3:08 pm

      Well, they went ahead and showed the video re-enactment anyway.

      Gad, what does the prosecution think it is doing, the job of the defense?

      I don’t see any need for GZ to testify now. He already has with these last two witnesses.

ProfitSlayer | July 1, 2013 at 11:19 am

Does anyone know who the pretty female is with the blue cardigan (next to the african american woman), sitting behind the State?

Officer Singleton, in the Miranda warnings augmented the warnings by telling Zimmerman what he says can be using against him if it proves his guilt, or words to that effect. To a reasonable person that may suggest that if his statement is not an admission of guilt, it cannot be used against him. I wonder if Florida law approves such a modification of Miranda. I think many jurisdictions would not. Of course, the defense wants the statement in evidence in any case.

Andrew – in a situation such as Zimmerman’s interrogation with the police after the incident, would it be to his advantage to invoke his 5th amendment rights and only proceed with the interrogation with a lawyer present? If he did do this could that be used against him later?

Zimmerman’s soft-spokenness in the recording is striking and a real positive for him. Also, his voice is not as deep-pitched as one might expect by looking at him, making it more reasonable for the jury to conclude that the help screams came out of his mouth.

So far Sanford PD seems to have done a textbook investigation. Very professional.

I sure hope the defense is astute enough in its cross of Singleton to use Zimmerman’s words to walk the officer through the meaning of those words using a map of the ares to show where Zimmerman was and where he went at the various points in time he is describing.

Uncle Samuel | July 1, 2013 at 11:49 am

TM – “What’s you problem, homey?”

GZ – “No, problem.”

TM – “You gotta problem now.”

TM punches GZ in the nose, knocks him down, continues to punch him, hold his mouth and nose, pounds his head into concrete.

GZ feels his shirt coming up and TM’s hands touching his side, but GZ gets gun first and shoots TM.

TM still conscious, says you got me. GZ turns over TM, says don’t move.

That taped interview is really compelling and Zimmerman is very credible.

Mansizedtarget | July 1, 2013 at 11:59 am

I liked her statement, “You did the right thing calling the police.”

Also, Zimmerman’s discussion with Singleton reveals why perhaps Trayvon thought he was creepy. He drove past, looped around, and then looked at him, and they then stared each other down. So I do think Trayvon may have been a little scared and angry at Zimmerman based on this. But obviously he could have gone home or called police and didn’t need to jump Zimmerman.

    legacyrepublican in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 1, 2013 at 1:37 pm

    Precisely! Trayvon had a way out that was clearly open to him, go home. Instead, out of anger and racism he confronted GZ, aka the “crepy ass cracker”, and wanted to whoop him bad and I think even kill GZ.

    This testimony and the prior testimony of his girlfriend paint the picture of an angry and hateful teenager with a big chip on his shoulder that he would not let go.

    That is what happens to somebody when the left teaches them that to forgive is not divine and to seek revenge is the goal.

Why is the prosecution putting the entire defense theory into evidence? Unless, the discrepancies in Zimmerman’s various are really damaging, and from the opening statement they do not appear to be, there is little reason for Zimmerman to testify.

    Voluble in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    I think we are all wondering the same thing and the answer seems to be that that is all they have. To get one little nugget favorable to the prosecution (that someone familiar with the screaming person might have a slightly better chance of recognizing them on a crappy audio recording) they have to let in the most compelling account of what actually happened.

    But even here the defense can point out that the father said it was not his son’s voice until he got in exactly the same sort of group situation the expert said to avoid (and before he figured out how profitable it could be to say the opposite). His first statement is more likely to be honest as it is against his interest. Then you will have Zimmerman’s sister claim it was George and the prosecution will have only lost ground for all of their effort.

    The reason this is the case is because there is no basis for prosecution. This is what a show trial looks like. It’s not pretty is it?

SANFORD, Fla. — As the trial of George Zimmerman enters its second week on Monday, it appears that the prosecution is struggling to meet the burden of proving him guilty of second-degree murder, legal analysts said.

The first week of the trial featured testimony from prosecution witnesses that in many instances bolstered Mr. Zimmerman’s argument of self-defense rather than the state’s case, the analysts said.

“When you are talking about state witnesses as if they are defense witnesses, that is a problem for the State of Florida,” said Diana Tennis, a prominent Orlando defense lawyer who is following the case. “And any time you end each day with either a zero-sum game or the defense coming out ahead, that’s a problem when you’re the prosecution.”

And THAT is the New York FLUKING Times, via JustOneMinute.

So, good. That will help condition the news that Zimmerman is acquitted, assuming…

    fogflyer in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 1:57 pm

    Yes! I was SO disgusted during the first week of this trial when I saw the headlines or talking heads stating how well the case was going for the prosecution. Now it seems they are starting to backtrack as they see no way to spin the overwhelming defense evidence (who again, have not even presented their case yet!) that keeps coming out.

Mansizedtarget | July 1, 2013 at 12:07 pm

I think prosecution is following theory that it’s better to introduce and address damaging stuff themselves rather than hide it. But these statements they did not need to introduce and now the whole statements, and arguably the reenactment too, can all be admitted because of the rule of completeness and to show what the state knew in the course of its investigation. There is no reason they had to bring them in, and they are clearly damaging as hell as they a) show a normal, scared, person in the form of Zimmerman and b) are fully supported or at least not strongly contradicted by every other eye witness’s testimony.

    rhorton1 in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 1, 2013 at 12:16 pm

    Typically the rule of completeness only requires the admission of portions of the same statement. All of which is being played for the jury. Other Zimmerman statements made on different days would not be admissible under that rule.

    rhorton1 in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 1, 2013 at 12:29 pm

    In Florida the rule of completeness is really broad. You’re correct, it looks like the judge has the discretion to authorize introduction of the reenactment:
    90.108 Introduction of related writings or recorded statements.—
    (1) When a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require him or her at that time to introduce any other part or any other writing or recorded statement that in fairness ought to be considered contemporaneously. An adverse party is not bound by evidence introduced under this section.

inspectorudy | July 1, 2013 at 12:21 pm

The prosecutor just displayed Zimmerman’s social security number and drivers license number for all to see. Does anyone think that might be for intimidation purposes for the jury? If you were one of them and saw such recklessness by the state would you expect the state to defend your privacy?

I have decided that listening to this officer attempt to read GZ’s handwritten statement is the most painful part of this trial thus far.

Compare Doris Singleton’s interview of George Zimmerman to what I said last year:

Suspect interviews are one of the most critical parts of an investigation. If it was me the first thing I would have done is mirandize Zimmerman. Some cops don’t like to do that for fear the suspect will invoke but my experience is that, guilty or innocent, people like to talk. I would also want the interview (including the reading of rights) to be videotaped. I would make sure I did everything right because I would not want any confession or admission excluded on a technicality.

Assuming the suspect wants to talk my first question would be simple – “Tell me what happened.” Then I would sit there and let him talk until he stopped. Whenever he slowed down or stopped I would ask open-ended type questions to keep him going.

Then once he had gone through the whole thing once I would have him go back over it in more detail. No matter what I thought of what he was telling me I would let him tell it. If he wants to lie, let him lie. Then I would go over it again and again.

I pretty much nailed it.

Doris Singleton can read cursive!

    Matt in FL in reply to myiq2xu. | July 1, 2013 at 12:30 pm

    She can barely read cursive. I could read what was projected on the screen far better than what she could what she was holding in her hand. I’d also point out that at least one of BDLR’s “suggestions” when she had difficulty was incorrect, by my reading.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 12:33 pm

      This is a guy’s handwriting – and one who has just shot someone and is extremely stressed. The Officer is not familiar with the statement, since she didn’t review it. Moreover, at her age, with the court room darkened a little, she may have needed her reading glasses.

      Her stumbling over that handwriting is not a sign she can barely read cursive.

        Matt in FL in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 1, 2013 at 12:35 pm

        Alright, that’s fair. I was just getting aggravated at her inability to read it, and I was yelling at my screen, because it was crystal clear to me.

          Aridog in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 12:39 pm

          What pissed me off was that Officer Singleton was even asked to read a hand written statement by someone she really doesn’t know…and that she had not reviewed previously. Period.

Andrew, I just saw your note at the top of the page. I’ve heard of a Twitter allowance, but only recently. The limit also seems to “lift” after a certain amount of time, so you may try again in a couple hours.

I can only hope your temporary limitation will let us see more of you in the comments section. Alternately, maybe it will let you get a jump on your end of day summary.

IANAL…so I am perplexed at this point. Can anyone tell me what sound reasoning is behind even calling Officer Singleton to the stand, then asking her to read a hand written statement by someone else?

    ftauqir in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 1:25 pm

    The prosecution needs to put out a timeline of exactly what happened, event after event. They also need to establish the credibility and validity of the evidence collected during his initial police interview.

    Its a technicality, simply put, they need evidence to prove that the evidence is true, accurate, and valid….

citizenjeff | July 1, 2013 at 12:37 pm

At this point, could the prosecution still argue that Zimmerman brandished or otherwise displayed his gun before Trayvon hit Zimmerman, even though it has not produced such evidence in discovery?

Andrew, according to Twitter your allowed 1,000 tweets per day and 250 direct messages. Here:

Hey folks,

I’ve just been informed by Twitter that I’ve sent too many tweets on the trial today–so, no more tweets for a while. Just in case anyone was wondering why I’d disappeared off the twitter feed.

–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

Andrew, they also say at bottom of page that the 1000 tweet limit is broken down into semi-hourly intervals.

    Yes, I saw that. I’ll try again this afternoon–and avoided getting goaded into responding to so many Zimm-haters. I suspect that THEY knew there was a max limit. 🙂

    –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

      healthguyfsu in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 1, 2013 at 1:02 pm

      Time to get a 2nd account. I wonder how many people hit these limits during the election debates and the Olympics when Twitter set records for usage?

      Karla1953 in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 1, 2013 at 1:47 pm

      IIRC when one gets put in Twitter “Jail” for exceeding the # of Tweets it is not an all day lock up…………..I would give it a merry whirl in a bit. Hope IRC as I am at work and rely on your great Tweets as well as the comments at this site to follow what is really happening in the Courtroom.

      Thanks to yourself and all the great commenters……….well almost all…………

    txantimedia in reply to styro1. | July 1, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    So no more than 20 tweets per half hour? How bizarre! Just reaffirms my decision to stop using Twitter.

      Oh, I think I was doing way more than that, but I don’t really fully understand Twitter.

      –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

        Harperman in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 1, 2013 at 1:34 pm

        Did you make too many tweets or was it that Twitter didn’t like what you were tweeting? LOL
        Me I don’t trust anything anymore, except for my 1911.LOL
        I was always fond of the scene in the first Conan movie where Conan’s father is showing him a sword he had just made and says something on the order of, “In this life you can trust no one, not man nor woman. But this you can trust.”

I’ve read a lot of support for Zimmerman and I’m puzzled. Most posts talk about the evidence or the “lack of evidence.” Which leads me to ask where were these same people during the Casey Anthony trial? The state has more evidence during this trial than they had during the Anthony trial, but there was a huge uproar about Casey possibly walking and then walking. Let me state I was horrified by her walking, but understood there was absolutely no evidence. This Zimmerman case has witnesses conflicting on who was on top and confronted who. Well I’ll say I’ve never seen a fight where the same person was on top the entire fight. I’ll also say that if I was a child, in the society that we now live in (child & sexual predators) and a stranger was following me at night and confronted me. I was have been scared as *** and would have probably tried to fight for my life. So in closing let’s forget about the races of the accused and the victim and let humanity kick in and remember an unarmed child is dead.

    healthguyfsu in reply to jock2000. | July 1, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    Was there a point to be made somewhere in there?

    If you “try to fight for your life” by starting a fight with someone you think is a threat to you and are beating the crap out of them but they have a weapon there’s a good chance you will die and they will be justified in killing you.

    Avoid confrontation, call the police, act like a civilized human being rather than someone looking for a fight.

    There is plenty of evidence that Zimmerman killed Martin. There is a complete lack of evidence that Zimmerman killed Martin in cold blood (i.e. not in self defense). That differs greatly from the Anthony trial where the defense asserted that she did not kill Kylie Anthony. The defense in this case asserts that Zimmerman killed Martin but in self-defense. Hope you are watching closely.

    txantimedia in reply to jock2000. | July 1, 2013 at 1:15 pm

    jock2000, I doubt there are many people who do not think that Trayvon’s death was a tragedy. Every unnatural death is a tragedy. However, If a stranger was following you at night, I would hope that you would run home rather than fighting with that stranger. That’s what Trayvon should have done. He would be alive today if he had simply gone inside the house. He chose a different path, and it cost him his life.

    That is the greatest tragedy of all.

    There is no evidence that Zimmerman confronted Martin, and there is testimony in the trial, from a Martin supporter, that Martin confronted Zimmerman.

    Please try to separate the facts from your emotions and look at this trial in the cold hard light of reality. This is a political persecution to placate a specific interest group. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Zimmerman never should have been charged with a crime, which is precisely what the Sanford Police Department’s investigation determined. Their professional opinion was overridden by politicians, and that should concern anyone who still holds the fantasy that we are a nation of laws.

    healthguyfsu in reply to jock2000. | July 1, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    Wait I’m not done yet as I almost missed your subtle little jabs at “humanity”

    “Let’s forget about the races of the accused and the victim.”

    Done. Forgotten. Does not enter into the discussion of justifiable homicide by self-defense. Have you forgotten?

    “let humanity kick in and remember an unarmed child is dead”

    And this one…yeah never heard that before. The old emotional plea to throw objectivity out the window. Do you realize that loaded statements like this make you look foolish? Humanity “kicks in” when we are talking about two people who both wanted to survive that night…why don’t you afford both people that same privilege in your mind.

    The “child” was beating the man…it does happen. According to Zimmerman’s testimony, the “child” went for the gun…also plausible and innocent until proven guilty.

    The state has essentially admitted that Martin attacked Zimmerman by suggesting his injuries were not that bad. It’s almost a foregone conclusion now that Zimmerman was being “beaten up” by Martin. He had every right to defend himself from that beating regardless of his race or Trayvon’s.

    gasper in reply to jock2000. | July 1, 2013 at 1:19 pm

    “… let’s forget about the races of the accused and the victim .. ” Why do you think this case has gone nationwide? There were people with an agenda who made race an issue. It’s the only reason you are even writing about it. We shouldn’t even know about this … it was a local issue. A bit late to be saying forget about it. The 6 foot plus “child” is dead, and Zimmerman killed him, but he’s dead because of his own actions. He could have gone home. doubt many people from this blog followed the Casey case. I don’t recall hearing it mentioned here. Finally, I once had a 6 foot three supervisor who worked for me, sucker-punched by a 5 foot 6 inch employee. That can guarantee top position for the remainder of the fight.

    styro1 in reply to jock2000. | July 1, 2013 at 1:27 pm

    jock2000, The state doesn’t have more evidence.1) The have GZ’s statement that TM was on top and witness Good’s to confirm it, everyone else only saw shadows. 2) From the time GZ said to dispatcher that TM was running to the time GZ hung up with dispatcher 1 minute and 59 seconds had passed. From where GZ said he started running to his fathers girlfriends house is approx. 450-500 feet. He could have easily ran home and been eating his Skittles and drinking his “Iced Tea” in that time. 3) I didn’t really follow the Anthony trial so I couldn’t tell you much about it. 5) The reason I’m paying attention to this trial is b/c it is pure politics to appease the BGI. As TM mother said, they didn’t care about a conviction they only wanted him charged. Why? Florida law immunizes anyone who kills or injures someone in self defense and can’t be held liable in civil court. If he was my child and I thought he killed him for no reason I want him to rot in prison. 6) When the media was reporting on this incident 12 yr old TM was just strolling home with candy and ice tea when big old white racist GZ shot him dead in cold blood.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to styro1. | July 1, 2013 at 2:01 pm

      The Crump law firm wanted Zimmerman charged BECAUSE without an arrest, they could not get the BIG $$$$ in a civil under FL law.

      In other words, it was a business decision on their part and a political decision on Obama’s part. Obama needed to stir up the black electorate to support him.

      Ugly, ugly, very UGLY people.

        Rational in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 1, 2013 at 4:11 pm

        What did Obama have to do with the decision to prosecute? NONE. Do you prove the point that this site is just a bubble for radical conservatives? YES.

        Did the Martin family have a tort by a preponderance of the evidence. DAMN YES.

      Rational in reply to styro1. | July 1, 2013 at 4:08 pm

      So what was GZ doing at the location of the altercation? He wasn’t looking for a street sign. He was pursing TM. Yeah, he walked all the way up that dark path to reach another street. How would that have helped him tell the police where he was? “Let me give you the street where I am not.

      GZ was playing cop. He was going to bring the ‘suspect’ to justice. Otherwise, what was he doing in the dark lane? Did TM have reason to think he was being stalked by a ‘crazy-ass cracker’. Yes.

No one raising hell over the prosecution giving the entire world Zimmerman’s social security number?

Not sure who’s busier right now–Nigerian scammers or investigative reporters from NBC.

    styro1 in reply to Browndog. | July 1, 2013 at 1:10 pm

    There’s a difference!

      legacyrepublican in reply to styro1. | July 1, 2013 at 2:01 pm

      Yes there is, the Nigerians will say they will send you money if you deposit a sum of money in an account they have access to and the MSNBC will give you fifteen minutes of fame if you deposit a boat load of racial crap on GZ in an account they have exclusive access to.

healthguyfsu | July 1, 2013 at 1:22 pm


Something you said about witness sequestration had me curious. Are witnesses held to the same rigor of sequestration as jurors?

It seems to me you can prohibit witnesses from being present in the court for reasons of modifying testimony but in today’s age is that outdated? We have live streaming video of the case in our living rooms for crying out loud.

I understand upholding this standard so as to not green light modifiable testimony in theory but in practice do witnesses truly get sequestered from the court by the same means as jurors?

Posting Zimmerman’s unredacted SSN and DL violated Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.425.

I just want to say that I’m fascinated by the interactions between the attorneys. I have very little exposure to court proceedings, so the combination of the occasional clear dislike between the attorneys and the professional courtesy (conversational asides between them and evidence they’ve been “working together,” and things like BDLR helping West or MOM with the computer & overhead projector is just fascinating to me.

txantimedia | July 1, 2013 at 1:45 pm

I can’t believe this testimony. Singleton is putting a human face on Zimmerman, showing that he didn’t even know that he’d killed Martin and that the knowledge of that impacted him emotionally.

How can this possibly be good for the state?

txantimedia | July 1, 2013 at 1:47 pm

Andrew, a completely technical question. Is there a reason that O’Mara and West take turns questioning witnesses? Is there some strategy involved? Or is it just a preference thing?

If Serino is called, and the State is basically saying that he made bad choices in his handling of this case, can we expect him to be somewhat adversarial with the State?

Ace is calling it a Girther conspiracy.

MSNBC is claiming that George Zimmerman gained weight to look “wimpier”

      wyntre in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 2:02 pm

      OMG! They are putting a hit out on him or trying to provoke riots or both!

      Fen in reply to EBL. | July 1, 2013 at 2:07 pm

      I’m hearing that “unauthorized disclosure of a SSN is a federal crime. 18USC 1028(a)(7)” ??

      Sue CNN into oblivion

        Uncle Samuel in reply to Fen. | July 1, 2013 at 2:34 pm

        The State/Prosecution is also liable for releasing papers with this information.

    Solomon in reply to Neo. | July 1, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    Zimmerman’s file from his exercise studio (early 2011?) listed his weight at 255 lbs, if memory serves. Seems like his normal state is soft and pudgy.

      JAL in reply to Solomon. | July 1, 2013 at 4:40 pm

      The paper (SPD Narrative Report) that was shown with the SSN et. al. on it also had a weight of 194 (self report, I assume) and a height of 5’8 or 9″? (Hard to read.)

      Looking at the video (day after walk through with police), he certainly doesn’t seem like he even weighed that much.

      He definitely showed no attitude or arrogance just a sort of “This is where I was, this is what I saw, this is what I did, this is what he did …”

      Having TM on the grass by one of the condos (off the sidewalk), having him walk around the truck … this is not normal pedestrian behavior.

Is that the first time the reenactment video has been mentioned in front of the jury? If I was on the jury, that’d make me want to see that tape, and if I wasn’t shown it, why not.

Does anyone know if the prosecution plans on calling any witnesses in this trial that benefit its case more than the defense’s?


Woman police officer on stand now says GZ didn’t know TM had died and when she informed him he dropped his head in his hands and was visibly shaken.

Another witness for the defense!

Zimmerman asks if officer is Catholic and then says in Catholic Religion it’s wrong to kill someone.

She said if he felt he had to use force in self defense God would not consider that wrong.

At the time there was no ID on the victim.

CNN broadcasts Zimmerman’s Social Security Number

She says she thought Zimmerman knew the victim was dead and his reaction surprised her.

This witness has certainly humanized GZ with the cross story and him hanging his head when he found out TM was dead.

“Tweet allowance”??? Another reason I avoid social media like the plague.

Why on earth are they proceeding with this charade? What’s the soonest the judge can direct the jury to acquit? That’s the only sane outcome here.

O’Mara’s cross of Off. Singleton is very good.

I can’t believe what I’m seeing. Just caught the last few minutes, and ANOTHER law enforcement witness for the State seems like a defense witness, and the State angrily attacks it’s own witness on re-direct.


Prosecutor seems to be getting testy with his own witness.

KrazyCrackaEsq | July 1, 2013 at 2:27 pm

This re-direct is painful to watch. Bernie is struggling.

Comment on Orlando Sentinel:

Showtime!!! Serino’s on the stand. I can’t wait until Bernie rips him to shreds!


I know it may be inappropriate, but after the prosecutor attempted to make a point about Zimmerman not being afraid because he holstered his weapon since Off. Singleton would not holster her weapon until a threat was neutralized, I was hoping O’Mara would ask, “To your knowledge, is George Zimmerman a police officer, or whether or not he has ever received any law enforcement training?”

Uncle Samuel | July 1, 2013 at 2:38 pm

Bernie the Bumbler.

This is BDLR’s favorite movie scene:

Doesn’t Serino sound like the quintessential hardbitten city cop? He’s straight out of central casting.

    txantimedia in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 2:44 pm

    Yes, and that BS he fed Zimmerman (I’m here for you) is only for the very naive. Fortunately for Z, although he’s naive, he just kept telling his story, and now the prosecution is telling it for him.

So the prosecution and media break the law by exposing GZ’s SSN! WOW! Now lets how this plays out in the press… Overwelming odds are that MSM headlines will revolve about some completely inane aspect of the trial testimony, and they will completely let this travesty go by uncovered, or printed on page 50.

State badgering its own witness again.

    Ragspierre in reply to JasonI. | July 1, 2013 at 2:48 pm

    I doubt VERY seriously that trend is lost on the jury.

    You MIGHT get away with it once or twice. But THIS…naw.

Sorry, but it sure seems this forum has a lot of people cheerleading zimmerman. As if you came here with a verdict already in mind… hmmm

I cannot believe the prosecution is introducing the re-enactment

txantimedia | July 1, 2013 at 2:50 pm

I wonder if West will ask Serino why he was reassigned to patrol?

Wow having already watched this I can’t believe the Prosecution introduced this either! GZ comes off so innocent in this video.

“I would have thought that as a neighborhood watch person he would have known the names of the streets,” said Singleton. She said it made her wonder if he “wanted” to get out of the car.

Of course he wanted to get out of the car – against the orders of the police dispatch as well.

    Now your speculating about what Singleton was speculating about Zimmerman.


    –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

    Ragspierre in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 3:04 pm

    Just FYI, no 9/11 operator has any power to “order” you to do jack diddly.

    Try to catch up.

      caambers in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 3:55 pm

      I adore you sometimes Rags…I truly do….

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 4:48 pm

      Indeed, a good 911 operator will append any advice offered with the codicil that the caller is the one on site and must ultimately decide what is best given the circumstances.

      Anyway, that’s what 911 tells my wife every Saturday night, “ma’am, we can’t tell you what to do about him. Use your best judgment.”

      Goetz von Berlichingen in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 5:05 pm

      hey Rags. 9/11 is a date. A very sad date.
      911 is an emergency number.

    Fen in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 3:19 pm

    I’m sure Z knows the names of the streets in his community. What Z said is that he didn’t actually remember which one this was. Diff between knowing and remembering where you are at night in pouring rain.

    Solomon in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:27 pm

    State’s witness (and fellow complex resident) Jenna Lauer testified that she, too, was unfamiliar with certain of the street names, despite the fact that there are just a few streets in the compex.

    JAL in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:54 pm

    When did the police dispatch order Zimmerman not to get out of the car?

    As far as street names — one of the first witnesses (one of the females) said SHE didn’t know the name of the street because there was no street sign there — which, IIRC from the video is what George Zimmerman says at one point.

One thing you gotta say, the prosecutor may have been niggardly during discovery, but they’re giving the jury everything.

The quality of this recording is so obnoxious, I’m pretty sure I can’t sit through 45 minutes of it. (I think that’s how long BDLR said it was when they asked the jurors about a bathroom break.)

I have never before had a situation where I could say “gobsmacked” … but this prosecution has provided that for me. One right after another…how many gobsmacks is standard?

    Aridog in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    Good grief…the playback is almost unintelligible. What is the purpose? Confuse Jurors?

    Aridog in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 3:37 pm

    More gobsmacking…Serino is about the worst interrogator I’ve ever heard. The guy talks too much, suggests too much, and never lets the suspect fill silence voids.

      Pauldd in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 4:15 pm

      The investigators have already had several open ended interviews where they let Zimmerman tell his story. They have got that on record. Now they are aggressively interrogating him to see whether they can shake his story. They even try to bluff him that the encounter may have been recorded on Travon’s cell phone. They are trying to intimidate him and put words into his mouth. All in all I think Zimmerman is holding up very well to intense and intimidating interrogation. On the essential operative facts he remains consistent.

I don’t find it that strange he could not think of the name of the street. In my old neighborhood where I lived for 6 years there were 2 streets that looped around the whole neighborhood that connected. I could never remember which one was which and I walked my dog around those streets for 6 years. I recall at least one of the witnesses who lived in the neighborhood also not being able to recall the street names.

    inspectorudy in reply to bizbach. | July 1, 2013 at 4:12 pm

    I agree. I have lived in my neighborhood for about 7 years and still do not know the all of streets in it. I never go down them and there is no real reason to know them other than curiosity or just a sense of wanting to know everything about your area. I know the streets that will get you to my home but not the ones in other areas. That revelation by Z will not stop the TM supporters who disbelieve everything he says anyway. If any of you have ever been in a life threatening event you know that it’s hard enough to get the details straight but to lie at that point would take a master like Bill or Hillary

One thing that kind of surprises me with these recorded statements is that (unless I missed it) neither side has prepared transcripts to hand out to the jurors so they can follow along. The audio is not crystal clear a lot of times.

    Ragspierre in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    IF you are right THAT would be a major oversight.

    The jurors could be assured to pick over that at length. It would be VERY important.

      rhorton1 in reply to Ragspierre. | July 1, 2013 at 3:34 pm

      I would think transcripts would be particularly crucial to the prosecution, as they are relying on supposed inconsistencies among the various statements. It is difficult to pick out inconsistencies in the audio morass.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 3:19 pm

    If I were a juror, I’d ask for a written transcript or CC, claiming age and hearing loss.

      Ragspierre in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 1, 2013 at 4:44 pm

      All admitted evidence is “of record”, and should be before the jury.

      That is, the jury can look at, feel, smell, shake…whatever…any exhibits or other evidence the Court has admitted.

    JasonI in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    I am baffled that the State is showing the re-enactment. Or are they required to?

    kringeesmom in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 4:35 pm

    Those statements are such a mess, I don’t think Dr. Nakasone could figure out what is being said.

i am watching the stream from and on the side is a box showing tweets. they are about 20 to 1 against GZ, and they are horrifying–not only the calls for riots and the death of GZ, but for the how ppl see the evidence. Some of my favorites:

GZ said “the rapist is circling my car”
GZ just showed his gang tats
I find it funny GZ and the neighbor say the same thing

This aint like no murder interview I’ve ever seen on The First 48 this looks like the police and Zimmerman are colluding #zimmermantrial


“I grabbed his hands & spread them apart from his body when I was on top of him” So Zimmerman admits he was on top.

@AndreaDMorgan According to Zimmerman, Trayvon was a Kung Fu/Taekwondo/Jiu Jitsu master. In truth, he was a teen with iced tea & skittles.

“He told me he was going to kill me” -Zimmerman ….with skittles in his hand…?

George W. Zimmerman 159 Edgewater Circle. Sanford, Florida. 32773, y’all know what to do.. Retweet this. He gone learn today.

Zimmerman admitted in the interview with the lead detective that Trayvon was the one telling “HELP” idk if anyone caught that.

If Zimmerman gets off I’m hopping on a plane to Florida to kill him my damn self y’all are going to see me in the news he’s a damn coward
Retweeted by DiabolicalCracker

If Zimmerman is found not guilty, it’s gone be a riot, hopefully in Houston too, ima purge, and hit up every mall and toy store for kj lol

    Browndog in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 1, 2013 at 3:34 pm

    yea, I kinda like the recent comment on the live chat: Hey, Zimmerman’s lying because his story never changes.

    There is no hope for this country.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 1, 2013 at 3:41 pm

    You really can’t teach this kind of stupidity and lack of common sense. They think the Edgewater Dr address is his current address.

    Guarantee you he is not there any more.

      And nobody else in their right mind would want to live there now either. Imagine innocently signing up to rent or buy it, not knowing that the address is circulating far and wide with hoards of feral blacks planning to descend on it with mayhem in mind. Hoo boy.

    randian in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 1, 2013 at 4:06 pm

    “He told me he was going to kill me” -Zimmerman ….with skittles in his hand…?

    This idiot has forgotten Trayvon also had a can of iced tea. That’s a dangerous and deadly weapon in HTH combat. Whack yourself on the head with the end of an unopened soda can if you don’t believe me.

      JAL in reply to randian. | July 1, 2013 at 5:02 pm

      Elsewhere (?) was the info that TM put the Skittles® and tea in his pockets at some point so both hands were empty when he questioned/accosted GZ.

Scary to see the comments but the jurors are the ones that matter. Poll on Brighthouse 13 (local cable provided) shows over 70% of people think the state has already lost. All these videos of the interviews just prove the Police did a thorough job and then decided not to charge him.

    Jazzizhep in reply to bizbach. | July 1, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    true, the jurors matter in this case, but the we have to deal with this drivel as the future of this country

    inspectorudy in reply to bizbach. | July 1, 2013 at 4:31 pm

    You are correct when you say that only the jurors matter. However CNN just aired Zimmerman’s address, driver’s license and social security number. Do you think that the jurors who saw the same data in open court might think that the state might just “Accidentally” release their personal data if necessary? It just might sway one or two to go the state’s way for their own personal security.

HAHAhahaha! Anyone else think that rhorton1, hesperus, Rational, possibly even John (the man who claimed to be Black and had two sons, very worried about all the *negative* comments found at this *prejudiced* site) and especially *Guest* are one and the same?

Notice the writing style. Guest goes to other blog sites, and one – “American Thinker” marks a large red dot next to all of *Guest’s* posts, mostly eliminating them in recognition that this is a twisted player. Probably works for some Acorn type agency, and gets everyone off topic with silly challenges and antics but never makes *rational* sense. Also challenges comments with rationality and undoubtedly thrills to this much attention. Anonymous writing makes it easy, eh? Ignoring this alinski type would bring a big-time pout!

    Browndog in reply to Jmaquis. | July 1, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    LI kinda got “famous” for their coverage, and a lot of websites linked.

    So, while you’ll get their readers, you’ll also get their trolls.

    hesperus in reply to Jmaquis. | July 1, 2013 at 4:02 pm

    take a deep breath mr conspiracy, lol. I can assure you that I am not any other member on this forum. Just find it curious to see such blatant cheerleading for zimmerman

      The evidence has been out for a year. You study it during that time? SPD decided not to charge. Lots of folks have come to a similar conclusion.

      Browndog in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:34 pm

      I have no idea how you found a “conspiracy” in my statement.

      Anywho, I tend to hang out on LI because I like to hang out with “high information citizens”, that have a handle on known facts before they post comments.

      Goetz von Berlichingen in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 5:17 pm

      what constitutes cheerleading? I know that I am personally hopeful the GZs story stands up because the trashing and false information put out by the press and TM’s family/representatives made me feel sympathetic for the poor guy.
      However, if the evidence were to conflict with his story I would wash my hands of him. That’s because I accept the rule of law. Also, I do not see anyone twisting the facts or hiding evidence to support GZ. It all happens on the TM side.

tweets i’ve seen (con’t):

Zimmerman has told 57 stories about an one event.

Zimmerman is so full of lies and deceit. He’s a natural born killer


Zimmerman knows damn well it wasn’t him who was screaming. If you have a gun & the other person is unarmed…why would you scream for help?


@ChandraDaphne what i think really happened was zimmerman had his gun out long before and made up that lie abt when the gun came out …

shoutout to the white power structure enabling cops & neighbors to testify why zimmerman used the best judgment possible

If they know Zimmerman killed homeboy, cant be but so much to prove.

#Zimmerman says #Trayvon was punching him with 1 hand, suffocating him with another, banging his head on concrete with another. #octopus?

Truly amazing what ppl believe, a complete disregard for anything resembling he facts in the case. And anyone who wonders why our rights are being eroded away, just read the tweets and you will an appalling lack of understanding for even the most rudimentary elements of law. Their world view is entirely filtered through a racial lens. Every

    Browndog in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 1, 2013 at 3:51 pm

    I think it speaks more to the power of the media/brainwashing.

    A lot of these people were, are, and will remain absolutely convinced Zimmerman hunted down Martin and murdered him.

      Aridog in reply to Browndog. | July 1, 2013 at 3:58 pm

      I think the Martin support crowd know full well what happened, but admitting it serves no purpose for them.

        hesperus in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 4:07 pm

        I don’t claim to know zimmerman’s innocence or guilt until I hear all the evidence, unlike the cheerleaders in this forum. There’s a long way to go yet, folks. Sit back, LISTEN, and hold your bias back a little bit

          JasonI in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:17 pm

          Keep in mind, all we’ve heard so far is the *prosecution’s* case. The actual defense hasn’t even started yet.

          He’s presumed innocent, unless he’s proven guilty. So far nothing I’ve seen has convinced me he’s guilty of second degree murder, so he gets to keep his presumption of innocence in my books until such times as the State proves otherwise.

      caambers in reply to Browndog. | July 1, 2013 at 4:01 pm

      Isn’t there some sort of phenomenon called the primacy effect ? Something about people who cling to the first thing they hear regardless of ensuing information. These are people who are unable to think critically or rationally…their thought processes lock on one aspect or one narrative and nothing will ever throw that switch. They are hopeless.

    Oh heck, I just accidentally “down-voted” Jazz’s comment when I meant to upvote it… and I can’t take it back 🙁 Sorry!

Sheppard Smith (Fox News) just said that “we all know he continued to do that”…meaning Zimmerman kept following Martin after being told “we don’t need you to do that”.

@Andrew: Saw your tweet about O’Mara rolling around in the mud on cross. The problem is, I think, that BDLR is going to run out the clock on today’s proceedings, leaving the jurors with this interview to chew on overnight.

you guys are all drinking the same koolaid here. remarkable phenomena.

Mrs. Leroy Goldberg | July 1, 2013 at 4:07 pm

The anti Zimmerman crowd felt that a guy standing in line for his lebron shoes was justified shooting a would be robber in the back as he was fleeing. After the shooting, he got back in line. This happened in Atlanta but it was black on black crime.

    There’ve been several young black men, who could have been Obama’s son, murdered here in Florida since Trayvon’s death. But all but one that I know of were shot by other blacks, so no one cares. Their parents are grieving every bit as much as Trayvon’s are, it’s horrific for any parent to lose a child, but no big-wigs are coming lighting candles for them. It’s very sad.

      randian in reply to AmyFL. | July 1, 2013 at 4:50 pm

      But all but one that I know of were shot by other blacks, so no one cares

      It’s not that nobody cares. It’s that:

      1) A black-on-black crime can’t be used to support the leftist political agenda, which the media plays a big part of.
      2) Under the rules of political correctness, things showing nonwhites in a bad light must not be aired.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Mrs. Leroy Goldberg. | July 1, 2013 at 4:46 pm

    Here’s some of Obama’s sons in action – beating a pregnant woman:

    Silence from Obama on this.

    Silence from Sharpton on the black gang of youths who beat an elderly man walking home from the grocery store in Jacksonville.

    Silence from Holder when a gang of blacks beat a white family at a gas station in Louisiana.

    Black on white crime exceeds White on Black by far.

Again the point I keep coming back to is that they obviously really grilled GZ and tried to get him to admit something. Yet they still did not charge him, that would be meaningful to me if I were a juror in this case.

    Dr Stiffy in reply to bizbach. | July 1, 2013 at 4:27 pm

    Exactly, the media and government made it sound like the local police department swept this under the rug and didn’t want to investigate because Martin was black. Obama got federal agencies involved using this argument.

    It appears the investigators were in fact thorough and actually pretty tough on him. Serino may seem like a nice guy, but that’s how he get’s information from people. He was definitely trying to get information from Zimmerman that could trip up his story.

I might have missed it, but has anyone offered an opinion about why Martin didn’t just go on to his dad’s girlfriend’s place? Was he cut off or what? In other words, why was he lingering around, in the rain, etc. He has a right to linger, but why did he if he could have made it to where he was staying.

    hesperus in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    I think you miss a lot. pay attention

    rokiloki in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 4:25 pm

    According to Rachel Jeantel, he did make it back to the place, at least to the back yard area. He apparently returned to confront the “creepy ass cracker” who had been following him earlier.

    Considering he was running, the distance and the timing, he reached that apartment. TM backtracked to the T for a confrontation.

    Goetz von Berlichingen in reply to Aridog. | July 1, 2013 at 7:22 pm

    I’ve heard no speculation on that in the trial. If you look at a map of the incident you can clearly see that TM was not trapped or cornered or the like. You will also see that, as testified, if he had indeed reached his dad’s girlfriend’s house (Or was ‘near’ it), that he was well out of whatever ‘danger’ he felt himself in. Allegedly felt himself in.
    The only way the confrontation with GZ occurs at that point is if he turns around and backtracks.

    Doesn’t appear to be the action of a frightened child to me.
    I went to AOS and used the great map they have there, should you be interested.

The appearance makeover of zimmerman is simply remarkable – He’s gone from white supremacist skinhead to pudgy shoe salesman. Did O’Mara and West foot his bill for twinkies? Did he decide (wisely) that a shaved head wouldn’t sit well with any jury?

Funny before the trial started someone that is sympathetic to GZ said the weight gain would make him look larger and more menacing. Yet now it is an intentional weight gain to make him look mousy?

    hesperus in reply to bizbach. | July 1, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    it’s how he looked at the time of the crime. A lot like how folks base their assumptions about trayvon’s character from his looks. Thing is, Zimm can change his, and trayvon, well…

      Uncle Samuel in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:53 pm

      Yes, TM looked so precious and endearing with his Tattoos, middle fingers erected, his threats, threats to beat up bus drivers, love for fighting, drugs and guns…his disrespect for teachers, burglary tools, loot of jewelry, marijuana in his backpack.

      A true son of Obama and Chicago gangsta culture.

      Ragspierre in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:59 pm

      You mean he looked like James Carville?

      Henry Hawkins in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 5:01 pm

      Thanks for confirming that so many people, yourself included, base questions of guilt or innocence in part or entirely on irrelevant details like skin color and body mass.

      The prosecution has so far presented a case that would be the dream of any defense attorney. They have no case.

      The defense hasn’t even begun its presentation, but the prosecution has done so well on behalf of Zimmerman’s defense, they could rest without presenting a thing and still win. Anyone predicting acquittal for Zimmerman is hardly biased or prejudiced, just attentive to the sum of exculpatory evidence entered by the, um, prosecution alone.

      If this were a football game, it would be 51-0 just before the half, Zimmerman leading.

      It’s kind of like this: even though all the evidence is not yet in, I predict the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

        Marshal in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 1, 2013 at 5:30 pm

        I’ve been trying to think of a sports analogy, but it can’t be football. The sport has to be structured so one team plays offense first. In this case even though they’re the only ones on offense they’re still losing. Maybe a one inning cricket match. Is there a way to score on defense?

    Karla1953 in reply to bizbach. | July 1, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    It seems that theory since floated on MSNBC this past weekend is picking up steam and becoming new TP for some. Sadly I expect that the local Nets here in the area will use it when giving their “expert” thoughts at the end of the day. The coverage has not been stellar and really tilts to Guilty until proven Innocent which is quite sad in many ways.

I haven’t managed to catch any of the tweets or video, our power (and thus my modem) has been on and off all day so I gave up, but am glad I have this site to come to so I can catch up. Thanks, Mr. Branca and all the commenters!

    hesperus in reply to AmyFL. | July 1, 2013 at 4:51 pm

    you might try catching up on another site, just to get a more balanced opinion on how the trial is going. Unless of course, you want to stay within a narrow window of opinion that runs ramapant here. Just sayin.

      Matt in FL in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 4:53 pm

      I didn’t find this site until day 2 of the trial. It’s not where I’m getting my opinions from. Those are mine, they come from me. I’m watching the trial, gavel to gavel, as if I was a juror myself. WHAT NOW?

        hesperus in reply to Matt in FL. | July 1, 2013 at 5:00 pm

        what I’m simply pointing out is that most people will go where they find validation for their opinions. Here it is very obvious what opinion that is, as well as other sites with opinions that stretch to the other side. It’s the ‘kool aid’ analogy. You go where you find like minded people. Myself, I like to pop in and see what each side is drinking. It’s entertainment for me.

      Aridog in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 5:09 pm

      And yet, still, here you are….against your own advice. Cute.

    hesperus in reply to AmyFL. | July 1, 2013 at 4:54 pm

    oh, and you’re welcome.

This is very good cross: it’s important to keep a witness apart from others so the witness’ information will not be contaminated. Compare Zimmerman who was unaware of other evidence when he was interviewed to Jeneal (or however you spell her name) who was throughly contaminated by the time she was interviewed.

    mbs in reply to rhorton1. | July 1, 2013 at 5:05 pm

    And Jeneal’s story changed over time to become more consistent with the prosecution’s theory. I did not find her to be at all credible.

legal questions: Can the defense call the county prosecutors who chose not to prosecute, or are these the same attorneys?

Is the defense able to introduce the defendants statements to police if the state chose not to call the detectives to the stand? It seems as if GZ got to testify w/o being cross-examined by an atty.

The latter question revolves around how it seems to be a rarity because most of the time the statements contain substantive inconsistencies on the part of the defendant. Obviously b/c the defendant is usually guilty.

MOre tweets….

Zimmerman shouldnt even be on trial , he admitted to killing Trayvon Martin . He shoulda been in jail !

“He had his hand over my mouth because I couldn’t stop screaming. Then he hit me.” – Zimmerman LMAO This is so dumb.

@jaketapper et al:why is the question only whether Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin in self defense: did he have to shoot to kill? JAKE TAPPER?

Megyn Kelly is as Racist as they come. The Defense is subject to call her to vouch for Zimmerman. (isnt she a former page to a supreme ct judge)

people aren’t gonna let this one go…. is only best they
put #Zimmerman behind bars. He’ll be safer there.

Zimmerman’s lawyer won’t be celebrating with ice cream cones with his daughters today!!!

From Piers Morgan:
Fact remains, if #Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle, #Trayvon would still be alive. #CNN (guess the brit doesn’t think americans should leave their cars, to follow someone or not)

– No Matter How They Try To Twist It And Turn It #Zimmerman Is Guilty , It Doesn’t Take A Damn Scientist To See That. –

Nancy Grace has had some doozies

    hesperus in reply to Jazzizhep. | July 1, 2013 at 5:04 pm

    thanks for pointing out the obvious with other sites tweets that stretch to the other side of your own pre determined opinion. More evidence of koolaid drinking here – ridicule the other side. It’s horrible that everyone just can’t see what you (appear) to see? Right?

      Henry Hawkins in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 5:27 pm

      Yes, you are correct and we will cease immediately. Frankly, I’m embarrassed, as I’m sure all these other people secretly are. But for you, we still would not have seen. Good job, you. You’re like some kind of online truth ninja guy.

      Goetz von Berlichingen in reply to hesperus. | July 1, 2013 at 5:29 pm

      And instead of pointing out logical fallacies, incorrect facts, assumptions about facts NOT in evidence, and other tools of the rhetorical logician, you just jump straight to accusations and innuendo.

      I guess that is your only course when you have no substance to offer.

        I especially appreciated the considered “shaved head” and “white supremacist” opening, along with the “Twinkies” insult.

        That introduction made me want to listen to whatever he might offer afterwards.

Bernie seems worried. I think he is getting really concerned about all of the prosecution’s witnesses helping the defense.