[mrsmel]

I hope that holds true. How in the world can the prosecution discount testimony merely because it’s favorable to Zimmerman, and came from an official? If he’d said something they like, they wouldn’t have discounted it. So, it’s not the official they have the problem with (or they could have objected to him before trial), it’s that what he said is favorable to the defense. Zimmerman doesn’t have a right to fair testimony, even if it turns out to be favorable to him? I thought the truth mattered (not really, but you know what I mean), search for the truth and all that. It’s only true if it discredits Zimmerman?

[colorado tanker]

The legal ground is that you can't call a witness to give an opinion about someone's credibility; it's the jury's job to assess credibility.

But that's really neither here nor there.

1. The move smacks of desperation and just highlights the unfavorable testimony.

2. The fact that the judge allowed a retroactive objection tells me the judge sees which way this trial is going and wants to protect the record against a possible mistrial.

[andyk]

Indeed, that happened. Later, the same witness claimed that Zimmerman was motivated by I’ll will. That testimony was allowed.

[chessplayer]

I hope that holds true. How in the world can the prosecution discount testimony merely because it’s favorable to Zimmerman, and came from an official?

---

Because the fix is in.