Has Zimmerman Waived His Right to a Pre-Trial "Stand-Your-Ground" Hearing?

[TripleDigitRide]

It falls under the Admissions category of exceptions to hearsay rules under Florida law. 90.803



As far as a hidden gotcha, no there really wasn't one, they needed this witness on the stand because his recounting of the story Z told him that he published in his book was different than what z told the police. The prosecution was attempting to point out inconsistencies in Zimmerman's story (a repeating theme throughout the trial). It was pretty much all explained away on cross as being the witnesses recollection of the story 4 month later at the time of writing his book, and that at the time of writing he did not have contact with Zimmerman to verify the information he was writing to be wholly accurate.



The prosecutors have been able to point out some inconsistencies so far, but nothing i view as particularly significant. I think that they were going for the quantity over quality approach and will likely hammer these more in their closing arguments.

I appreciate the answer thanks.


Seems like an expensive ploy,. That testimony sounded as close as we're gonna get of a 1st hand account assuming GZ doesn't take the stand.

The State lacks any real evidence for the jury, so they have been throwing anything and everything at the jury, hoping that something will stick.

I've never watched so much of a trial before, and I find it quite disturbing that the State is allowed to blatantly project so much emotion on to the jury. I'm equally disturbed at how the State has been allowed to make some under-handed comments and physical gestures, obviously insinuating things that he may not otherwise be allowed to come right out and say.

This case has not given me a much faith in our system, even if the jury reaches the verdict that I think they should.

[Erik88]

Well if it helps anyone sleep better there won't be a hung jury.  He will be found not guilty.  I expect a last minute plea deal from the prosecution which will be turned down.  There has yet to be a witness that the defense hasn't ripped apart and used as their own.

 

I'm confused, all along you've been convinced he was guilty. If you believe he is guilty why are you convinced he will be found not guilty? 

[knewcomb]

It will be interesting to see the testimony from the mother. No doubt it will be emotionally charged and rightfully so. Im wondering what she can really say without bringing up TMs character, history, etc. At that point the door would be open for the defense

[Garufa]

I wondering if the defense will ask how much she has profited from donations, t-shirt sales, etc?

[Randall53]

It will be interesting to see the testimony from the mother. No doubt it will be emotionally charged and rightfully so. Im wondering what she can really say without bringing up TMs character, history, etc. At that point the door would be open for the defense

 

I seriously doubt that she can restrain herself. The tears will flow, the rambling will begin and with several mentions of the terms "My baby", "heart of gold", "never done noth'n", "loved everybody" laced throughout.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm confused, all along you've been convinced he was guilty. If you believe he is guilty why are you convinced he will be found not guilty? 

Because he has a brain, Erik. You know? People can change their views. This isn't a sport being watched. There are

reasons people have the views they express. It, sometimes has to do with their life experiences. Something that may

be different from yours or mine.

[mikegideon]

Oh, and by the way, that was eloquent.

 

May not be eloquent, but you can visualize one bobbing on Bernie's forehead as he's spewing some irrelevant, emotional bullshit... admit it :)

[DaveS]

Because he has a brain, Erik. You know? People can change their views. This isn't a sport being watched. There are

reasons people have the views they express. It, sometimes has to do with their life experiences. Something that may

be different from yours or mine.

Very well said. Even I am starting to see some things!

 

DaveS

[mikegideon]

Very well said. Even I am starting to see some things!

 

DaveS

 

I don't know what to say! :)

[TMF]

I'm confused, all along you've been convinced he was guilty. If you believe he is guilty why are you convinced he will be found not guilty?

If you care so much how about you go back and reread my posts where I have said from the beginning that he will not be found guilty unless the state provides strong evidence.

I don't know if it is a matter of ignorance on your part or you are just trying to be insulting to suggest I can't separate opinion from fact. I do think he is guilty of manslaughter at a minimum, but without sufficient proof I don't think he will be convicted nor should he be. I thought the prosecution would provide us with a better breakdown of the events/timeline leading up to the confrontation through evidence and witness testimony, as well as provide us with character witnesses to speak on Zimmerman's state of mind. They have failed thus far to effectively do that. I gave them the benefit of the doubt that such evidence and witnesses existed due to the murder 2 charge versus charging him with manslaughter. It isn't looking like that is the case. Somehow I am able to separate my feelings on his guilt from what I believe should happen in a court of law.... that must be some sort of superpower I guess.

[Guest nra37922]

Way way waaaaay to much coverage for a trial,  If this was a black on black, white on white or black on white trial the coverage would be close to if not zero.   And BTW where was all the frickin national media attention with the trials of the black animals that rape, sodomized, tortured and killed Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom here in Knoxville 7 Jan 2007.

 

According to the testimony of the Knox County Acting Medical Examiner Dr. Darinka Mileusnic-Polchan at the subsequent trial of Eric Boyd, Newsom was repeatedly sodomized with an object and then blindfolded, gagged, arms and feet bound and his head covered. Barefoot, he was dragged outside the house to a set of nearby railroad tracks. He was sexually mutilated, shot in the back of his head, neck and back and his body was then set on fire.

 

According to the testimony of the medical examiner, Channon's death came after hours of torture, having suffered injuries to her vagina, anus and mouth. She was raped with an unidentified object and beaten in the head. It was also reported that her body was scrubbed with bleach which was also poured down her throat, in an attempt by her attackers to remove DNA evidence, while Channon was still alive. She was then bound with curtains and strips of bedding, her face covered with a bin liner and her body stashed within five large bin bags, before being placed inside a residential waste disposal unit and covered with sheets. The medical examiner said there was evidence that Channon slowly suffocated to death.

 

SO I really really don't care for all the coverage of a thug being shot by a Hispanic....

 

[Erik88]

If you care so much how about you go back and reread my posts where I have said from the beginning that he will not be found guilty unless the state provides strong evidence.

I don't know if it is a matter of ignorance on your part or you are just trying to be insulting to suggest I can't separate opinion from fact. I do think he is guilty of manslaughter at a minimum, but without sufficient proof I don't think he will be convicted nor should he be. I thought the prosecution would provide us with a better breakdown of the events/timeline leading up to the confrontation through evidence and witness testimony, as well as provide us with character witnesses to speak on Zimmerman's state of mind. They have failed thus far to effectively do that. I gave them the benefit of the doubt that such evidence and witnesses existed due to the murder 2 charge versus charging him with manslaughter. It isn't looking like that is the case. Somehow I am able to separate my feelings on his guilt from what I believe should happen in a court of law.... that must be some sort of superpower I guess.

 

 

I wasn't suggesting anything. I understand you feel he is guilty(and it's fine to hold that opinion) but I'm trying to understand why you are convinced he will be found innocent if you are also convinced he is guilty. 

 

What facts in the case do you think the state will have trouble proving that also lead you to believe he is guilty? 

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well if it helps anyone sleep better there won't be a hung jury.  He will be found not guilty.  I expect a last minute plea deal from the prosecution which will be turned down.  There has yet to be a witness that the defense hasn't ripped apart and used as their own.

With this prosecution team, the only thing coming from them will be a last minute beg for a plea deal, just so they

can attempt to cover their own political asses. They have shown their incompetence too much, already. Corey and

the governor of Florida should be ashamed of themselves to have fallen into this political trap. All they will have

done is to make themselves into a laughing stock.

 

But, then, there is Eric Holder waiting to file charges with a federal statute, which will cause even more harm. I doubt

Holder cares, since he didn't bother to deal with the Panthers, a few years ago. Racism cuts both ways with this bunch.

[Erik88]

Because he has a brain, Erik. You know? People can change their views. This isn't a sport being watched. There are

reasons people have the views they express. It, sometimes has to do with their life experiences. Something that may

be different from yours or mine.

 

I have no problem with him changing his mind but that's not what he said. He still believes he is guilty but also thinks he will be found not guilty.

 

It doesn't make any sense.

[TMF]

I wasn't suggesting anything. I understand you feel he is guilty(and it's fine to hold that opinion) but I'm trying to understand why you are convinced he will be found innocent if you are also convinced he is guilty. 

 

What facts in the case do you think the state will have trouble proving that also lead you to believe he is guilty? 

 

 

Did you even read any of my posts to answer your own question?  I've said they don't have the evidence to convict him.  Without sufficient evidence people aren't supposed to be found guilty.  That is how the system is supposed to work.

[DaveS]

I have no problem with him changing his mind but that's not what he said. He still believes he is guilty but also thinks he will be found not guilty.

 

It doesn't make any sense.

It makes perfect since! I think Zman is guilty as hell! However, he will be found "not guilty" because the pros team hasn't proved anything yet. Simple. What's not to understand?

 

Dave

[TripleDigitRide]

It makes perfect since! I think Zman is guilty as hell! However, he will be found "not guilty" because the pros team hasn't proved anything yet. Simple. What's not to understand?

 

Dave

It's a near impossible feat to prove something that was never there to begin with.

[Erik88]

Did you even read any of my posts to answer your own question?  I've said they don't have the evidence to convict him.  Without sufficient evidence people aren't supposed to be found guilty.  That is how the system is supposed to work.

 

I understand that. I'm not sure why you're getting so defensive.

 

Let me rephrase, if there is no evidence to convict him why do you personally feel he is guilty of manslaughter "at a minimum"? 

[mikegideon]

It makes perfect since! I think Zman is guilty as hell! However, he will be found "not guilty" because the pros team hasn't proved anything yet. Simple. What's not to understand?

 

Dave

 

They had their chance, with all the resources of the state, and the blessings of King Obama himself. Why would something that is so obvious to you, be so hard to prove?

[RichardR]

Apparently if someone "feels" someone is guilty, than they must be, even if all of the evidence & *credible* testimony points towards innocence.

[TMF]

I understand that. I'm not sure why you're getting so defensive.

 

Let me rephrase, if there is no evidence to convict him why do you personally feel he is guilty of manslaughter "at a minimum"? 

 

I think we've been through that enough times without having to post it all again.  What transpires next is about 50 pages of circular debate when what it boils down to is it is my opinion, and I can't transpose my professional a personal experiences into your head so that you could interpret information the way I do.  It just can't be done.

 

And I wasn't being defensive.  I took your suggestion that I can't separate personal opinion from the burden of proof required to convict someone of a crime as an insult.  People go free all the time and folks think they are guilty.  Watch Dateline or 48 Hours... nearly every one of those cases are exaclty that or the opposite. 

 

I'm sorry that you don't understand why someone could hold the opinion that a person is guilty while at the same time believing it to be a miscarraige of justice to be convicted without sufficient evidence.  I guess you believe OJ was innocent of killing his wife and her friend.  After all, he was found not guilty.

[TMF]

Apparently if someone "feels" someone is guilty, than they must be, even if all of the evidence & *credible* testimony points towards innocence.

 

It's called an opinion.  Get over it.  I don't see why people like you get your panties twisted in such a wad that someone disagrees with you that you post some bullsh** suggesting what you're suggesting above.

[bubbiesdad]

It will be interesting to see the testimony from the mother. No doubt it will be emotionally charged and rightfully so. Im wondering what she can really say without bringing up TMs character, history, etc. At that point the door would be open for the defense

It's been many years since I have testified in Court. But at the time, witnesses couldn't be in the courtroom prior to their testimony. Is this just a TN thing, or perhaps a civil trial thing?

[jgradyc]

I've watched most of the trial live online or on tape.

 

So far, only the prosecution has presented its case. All the defense has done is cross-examined, yet the testimony overwhelmingly supports Zimmerman's position.

 

What should be worrisome for us with HCP permits is that the prosecution is almost solely basing its questioning on emotional reactions and in many cases, completely distorting the law. For example, the prosecution attempted to portray carry with a round in the chamber as somehow supporting the claim of second degree murder. Of course, some jurists wouldn't know one way or the other, so this is really deceptive.

 

Someone with a law background help me out here. Assume I'm on a jury. When the prosecution suggests that the law reads one way and the defense suggests its something else, how can a jurist find out what the law really is? Is it in their jurors' notebooks?

Edited July 4, 2013 by jgradyc

[DaveS]

I think we've been through that enough times without having to post it all again.  What transpires next is about 50 pages of circular debate when what it boils down to is it is my opinion, and I can't transpose my professional a personal experiences into your head so that you could interpret information the way I do.  It just can't be done.

 

And I wasn't being defensive.  I took your suggestion that I can't separate personal opinion from the burden of proof required to convict someone of a crime as an insult.  People go free all the time and folks think they are guilty.  Watch Dateline or 48 Hours... nearly every one of those cases are exaclty that or the opposite. 

 

I'm sorry that you don't understand why someone could hold the opinion that a person is guilty while at the same time believing it to be a miscarraige of justice to be convicted without sufficient evidence.  I guess you believe OJ was innocent of killing his wife and her friend.  After all, he was found not guilty.

Well said!