Weed, fights and guns: Trayvon Martin’s text messages released

[Guest nra37922]

So what have we learned so far?  IMHO other than this trial being a miscarriage of justice and a political hit job on GZ not one gosh darn thing. 

Edited July 6, 2013 by nra37922

[TripleDigitRide]

So what have we learned so far?  IMHO other than this trial being a miscarriage of justice and a political hit job on GZ not one gosh darn thing. 

I have learned to let thy thief rob thy neighbor. Unless you are directly harming me or my family, every man for himself. And in the event I am forced to protect myself or family, don't talk to anyone except an attorney. I think I already knew that part, but this case has strengthened that belief. 

Edited July 6, 2013 by TripleDigitRide

[jgradyc]

So what have we learned so far?  IMHO other than this trial being a miscarriage of justice and a political hit job on GZ not one gosh darn thing. 

NEVER lose situational awareness in the minutes after you think an incident is over.

NEVER put yourself in a situation like GZ did, walking down a dark dog walk behind buildings in the dark.

[jgradyc]

What it seems to me.... State can bring in Zimmerman's kindergarten scribbling to use but defense cannot use TM drugs or fighting history.
The judge pretty adamantly said today the tox report with THC levels could not be introduced.

I wonder if the MEs statement when the jury was out that TMs THC levels could have affected him... and the judge's ruling that this could not be introduced as evidence... could be grounds for appeal or mistrial if Z is convicted. Although I doubt he will be convicted.

[TNMTBik3r]

I wonder if the MEs statement when the jury was out that TMs THC levels could have affected him... and the judge's ruling that this could not be introduced as evidence... could be grounds for appeal or mistrial if Z is convicted. Although I doubt he will be convicted.

Just one of many things that can be considered grounds for appeal or mistrial...

[Guest 6.8 AR]

This. A directed verdict would be a bad, bad, bad thing for everyone. A jury must return the not guilty verdict.

It may be bad in this case, but it is the judge's job,
I think, when there may be too many errors, or the
jury can't follow instructions. I doubt many judges
care to see reversals in an appellate court, based
on something they could control. Of course I could be wrong, also.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

defense was pretty tactful with the mother. She understood his question and played dumb that she did not understand. I hope the jury understood the answer.

I wonder what credibility she really has. She is no
witness to anything.

[TripleDigitRide]

I wonder what credibility she really has. She is no
witness to anything.

 

If she had any credibility, the defense nullified that with Mrs. Zimmerman claiming that the screaming was coming from her son. And if that wasn't enough, Zimmerman's uncle's claim was sure to do it.

Edited July 6, 2013 by TripleDigitRide

[Guest Charis]

Do ya'll think Zman will take the stand? I hope he does.

 

Dave

 

Only the worst kind of fool would take the stand at this point. The prosecution has very nicely entered GZ's entire story for him, and provided a number of witnesses that back it up. While it is his right to testify in his own defense, he can only cause himself problems by allowing himself to be questioned by the prosecution, so I wouldn't hold your breath or anything, it's so unlikely it's reaching the realm of catching Santa and the Easter bunny hanging out at your kitchen table.

 

Oh, the ME did a fine job of discrediting himself.  :rofl:

 

I was under the impression that the defense could not bring the toxicology report to the jury's attention. 

 

You would be under the right impression.

That is why his mothers testimony was so cold, she could not say much of anything outside her pre-approved script and suddenly had issues understanding plain English when the defense questioned her, ESPECIALLY not anything nice about her son, as it would blast open the door about TM's past. I understand why the prosecution went this direction, but as someone that matches the profile of the majority of the jurors, it just did not come off well at all.

 

What I want to know is why no one asked TM's mom about the YEARS her son didn't live with her (which would be the majority of them), or push the brother just how well he could have known TM since they lived in two different places. It is my fervent hope that they did this because they are planning on calling the woman that actually raised TM, as well as Tracy Martin, who said it was not his son's voice ... until the lawyers showed up promising god only knows what, that is.

[Mike.357]

I wonder what credibility she really has. She is no
witness to anything.

 

she was there strictly to say the screaming was coming from her kid.

[Djay3]

I wonder if the MEs statement when the jury was out that TMs THC levels could have affected him... and the judge's ruling that this could not be introduced as evidence... could be grounds for appeal or mistrial if Z is convicted. Although I doubt he will be convicted.

I would hope such a ruling by the judge would be grounds for appeal. It is beyond my understanding how a toxicology report could be sheltered from the jury by the judge quashing it! To a layman like me it screams "Appeal Fodder!"

If the worst pans out for GZ, I would think it a very hollow victory for the liberal segment of Florida (in the longterm). The impact could potentially result in economic boycotts from a not insignificant segment of the U.S. population. I sure as H wouldn't set foot in that state again.

[c.a.willard]

i wonder if they tried harder with TM's moms cross if they could have got to more of TM's past actions.  Specifically the point that she said her son was in heaven.  wouldn't a simple clarifying question to that statement be all that was really needed to slam that door wide open.    Granted this would have been a completely classless move, and wouldn't win any likability points with the jury.

[Guest Charis]

i wonder if they tried harder with TM's moms cross if they could have got to more of TM's past actions.  Specifically the point that she said her son was in heaven.  wouldn't a simple clarifying question to that statement be all that was really needed to slam that door wide open.    Granted this would have been a completely classless move, and wouldn't win any likability points with the jury.

 

While I agree with the feeling that TM's mom should have been pushed harder, being a classless move is completely besides the real point in this decision.

 

The rational logic is that the defense does not want to be seen as beating up on the mother of a dead child, no matter if the child was a saint or the devil himself. Women, even nice rational women, will not accept that and by doing it the defense would give the jury a reason to give TM's mom more credibility than she would warrant on her own. And as you have a jury that is nothing but women, this would have been a catastrophic mistake.

 

And honestly, I wouldn't have touched the heaven statement she made if my life depended on it. Every mother, even those of admitted murders and child rapists, believes that her baby goes to heaven, no matter what he did. Questioning that belief would be even worse than going hard at the mother, the defense might as well strap GZ into the electric chair right there in the court room if they even hinted they would question this statement.

[c.a.willard]

your post clarified more what i was talking about with likability i just didn't elaborate on it.  I agree that at the time it would not have been worth the damage they would do to themselves in getting there at that time.  Just part of me (the always curious part) wonders if they could have.    

 

I think the defense still has a plan to try to open that door with their witnesses although they may not necessarily need to.   they also have more than enough for the appeals process if the verdict doesn't go their way.

[bubbiesdad]

i wonder if they tried harder with TM's moms cross if they could have got to more of TM's past actions.  Specifically the point that she said her son was in heaven.  wouldn't a simple clarifying question to that statement be all that was really needed to slam that door wide open.    Granted this would have been a completely classless move, and wouldn't win any likability points with the jury.

 

 

While I agree with the feeling that TM's mom should have been pushed harder, being a classless move is completely besides the real point in this decision.

 

The rational logic is that the defense does not want to be seen as beating up on the mother of a dead child, no matter if the child was a saint or the devil himself. Women, even nice rational women, will not accept that and by doing it the defense would give the jury a reason to give TM's mom more credibility than she would warrant on her own. And as you have a jury that is nothing but women, this would have been a catastrophic mistake.

 

And honestly, I wouldn't have touched the heaven statement she made if my life depended on it. Every mother, even those of admitted murders and child rapists, believes that her baby goes to heaven, no matter what he did. Questioning that belief would be even worse than going hard at the mother, the defense might as well strap GZ into the electric chair right there in the court room if they even hinted they would question this statement.

 

I'm sure all of us have been to at least one funeral where we were wondering who the minister was talking about when they were saying what a "great person" the deceased was.

[Guest nra37922]

Maybe the defense will just wrap up on Monday.  No need for any additional witnesses on their side as the prosecutions were more than helpful. 

[Guest Charis]

Maybe the defense will just wrap up on Monday.  No need for any additional witnesses on their side as the prosecutions were more than helpful. 

 

 

I don't think that will happen, they have so many doors they have opened, and at least one super huge expert they had to pay a small fortune for.

 

For example, we know outside the courtroom that TM was actually raised for the majority of his life, something only hinted at with the questions to TM's brother, and not mentioned to his mother at all. These tantalizing hints need to be brought home, I think with the stepmother that had TM from age 3 to 15. This puts serious doubt on the voice identification of both the mother and the brother, without attacking them directly. Defense gold mine that I would personally wouldn't pass up for anything.

 

Also, we have Tracy Martin, TM's father, who was asked shortly after the death (a matter of days) by police if that was his son's voice, and he said no, he continued to say no until the lawyers and race baiters started showing up, promising god only knows what.

 

Then you have Crump, the Martin lawyer, so we can find out what those promises were. 

 

And I would like to think, after the disaster of the ME, they might call someone who knows the protocols of an autopsy to show exactly how much this one was botched by this incompetent man that doesn't remember anything, or know anything because it isn't his job. 

 

Oh, and of course they will have to call someone to combat the last second evidence of weather. In Florida, where I lived most of my youth, I can personally remember looking out a bright sunny window while my mother on the other side of the house told me I could not go out because it was pouring rain out the window she was looking out of. A few FEET can make a difference to the weather, and account for the discrepancy of the witnesses about the rain that night, a few MILES away is completely inconsequential and only makes the prosecution look desperate at springing this evidence last minute.

 

That is just a few of the wide open doors I would think they plan to clean up along with calling the gunshot expert to tell us all about how TM was bent over GZ when he got shot, proving self defense.

[TripleDigitRide]

In an interview on Friday, the defense said that they expected to rest their case on Wednesday or Thursday. He also said that he was enjoying himself, so he could go longer if needed.

[Guest nra37922]

If the jury has any guts then after the not guilty verdict is read they should berate the prosecution, the judge and the State for even bring this farce forward.  A good public verbal flogging seems to be in-order.

[eRay]

If the jury has any guts then after the not guilty verdict is read they should berate the prosecution, the judge and the State for even bring this farce forward.  A good public verbal flogging seems to be in-order.

There may not be a not guilty verdict. The six women on the jury may decide that it would be better to sacrifice one innocent man than to start the looting, rioting, and burning that might cost many more lives. That would not be my decision but it could well be theirs.

[Guest nra37922]

There may not be a not guilty verdict. The six women on the jury may decide that it would be better to sacrifice one innocent man than to start the looting, rioting, and burning that might cost many more lives. That would not be my decision but it could well be theirs.

That has been my feelings for quite awhile.  So just say frick Justice and lets be PC and sell out.  Maybe ts time for another beer summit... 

[RobertNashville]

At the start of this trial I really thought that the prosecution must have something to present that would at least justify their choice to prosecute. Not because I thought Zimmerman was guilty but simply because I really didn't think the state would go to trial without knowing something that we didn't. However, at the end of the prosecution's case and having watched much of it; I'm more convinced than ever that Zimmerman made a righteous shot.  Even if I didn't know anything about Martin's past, I see absolutely nothing in the prosecution's case that suggest manslaughter, much less murder.  Other than innuendo and a "mother's" claim that it was her little Trayvon crying for help, the prosecution has not presented anything that throws credible doubt on Zimmerman's account of what happened that night; their own witnesses seem to have strengthened Zimmerman's accounting of what happened.

Unless the jury is extremely predisposed to find him guilty I expect Zimmerman will be acquitted or at worst, a hung jury.

 

If he is acquitted then I think the state will have a difficult time not ruling that the shooting was justified which will protect Zimmerman from civil suite (just as it does in TN).

[Sam1]

Will be interesting to see what happens, remember that a jury down there just let Casey Anthony walk!

[Guest nra37922]

BSNBC News Update

 

Al Charlatan is reporting that George Zimmerman is to be indicted in Casey Anthony murder.   Jesse Jackass will have more live at 11 exclusively on BSNBC

[DaveS]

At the start of this trial I really thought that the prosecution must have something to present that would at least justify their choice to prosecute. Not because I thought Zimmerman was guilty but simply because I really didn't think the state would go to trial without knowing something that we didn't. However, at the end of the prosecution's case and having watched much of it; I'm more convinced than ever that Zimmerman made a righteous shot.  Even if I didn't know anything about Martin's past, I see absolutely nothing in the prosecution's case that suggest manslaughter, much less murder.  Other than innuendo and a "mother's" claim that it was her little Trayvon crying for help, the prosecution has not presented anything that throws credible doubt on Zimmerman's account of what happened that night; their own witnesses seem to have strengthened Zimmerman's accounting of what happened.

Unless the jury is extremely predisposed to find him guilty I expect Zimmerman will be acquitted or at worst, a hung jury.

 

If he is acquitted then I think the state will have a difficult time not ruling that the shooting was justified which will protect Zimmerman from civil suite (just as it does in TN).

 

At the start of this trial I really thought that the prosecution must have something to present that would at least justify their choice to prosecute. Not because I thought Zimmerman was guilty but simply because I really didn't think the state would go to trial without knowing something that we didn't. However, at the end of the prosecution's case and having watched much of it; I'm more convinced than ever that Zimmerman made a righteous shot.  Even if I didn't know anything about Martin's past, I see absolutely nothing in the prosecution's case that suggest manslaughter, much less murder.  Other than innuendo and a "mother's" claim that it was her little Trayvon crying for help, the prosecution has not presented anything that throws credible doubt on Zimmerman's account of what happened that night; their own witnesses seem to have strengthened Zimmerman's accounting of what happened.

Unless the jury is extremely predisposed to find him guilty I expect Zimmerman will be acquitted or at worst, a hung jury.

 

If he is acquitted then I think the state will have a difficult time not ruling that the shooting was justified which will protect Zimmerman from civil suite (just as it does in TN).

 

 

At the start of this trial I really thought that the prosecution must have something to present that would at least justify their choice to prosecute. Not because I thought Zimmerman was guilty but simply because I really didn't think the state would go to trial without knowing something that we didn't. However, at the end of the prosecution's case and having watched much of it; I'm more convinced than ever that Zimmerman made a righteous shot.  Even if I didn't know anything about Martin's past, I see absolutely nothing in the prosecution's case that suggest manslaughter, much less murder.  Other than innuendo and a "mother's" claim that it was her little Trayvon crying for help, the prosecution has not presented anything that throws credible doubt on Zimmerman's account of what happened that night; their own witnesses seem to have strengthened Zimmerman's accounting of what happened.

Unless the jury is extremely predisposed to find him guilty I expect Zimmerman will be acquitted or at worst, a hung jury.

 

If he is acquitted then I think the state will have a difficult time not ruling that the shooting was justified which will protect Zimmerman from civil suite (just as it does in TN).

 

 

At the start of this trial I really thought that the prosecution must have something to present that would at least justify their choice to prosecute. Not because I thought Zimmerman was guilty but simply because I really didn't think the state would go to trial without knowing something that we didn't. However, at the end of the prosecution's case and having watched much of it; I'm more convinced than ever that Zimmerman made a righteous shot.  Even if I didn't know anything about Martin's past, I see absolutely nothing in the prosecution's case that suggest manslaughter, much less murder.  Other than innuendo and a "mother's" claim that it was her little Trayvon crying for help, the prosecution has not presented anything that throws credible doubt on Zimmerman's account of what happened that night; their own witnesses seem to have strengthened Zimmerman's accounting of what happened.

Unless the jury is extremely predisposed to find him guilty I expect Zimmerman will be acquitted or at worst, a hung jury.

 

If he is acquitted then I think the state will have a difficult time not ruling that the shooting was justified which will protect Zimmerman from civil suite (just as it does in TN).

As much as I hate to admit this Robert, I'm beginning to think the same. All personal reasons aside.....

 

Dave