Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

State seeks to halt animated re-enactment of Trayvon shooting
Reuters ^ | July 8, 2013 | Barbara Liston

Posted on 07/08/2013 6:49:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

Prosecutors asked a Florida judge on Monday to block the jury in the George Zimmerman trial from seeing an animated re-enactment of the shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, saying the video distorts the events of that fatal encounter.

Defense lawyers want to show the video to the six-woman jury that will decide the fate of Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder and has pleaded not guilty, saying he shot Martin in self-defense.

State prosecutors argued that the video fails to show the Kel Tec 9mm pistol that Zimmerman, 29, a white and Hispanic neighborhood watch volunteer, used to shoot Martin, 17, once through the heart.

Prosecutors also objected because they said the animation video shows details of the fatal struggle based on the animator's "approximations," including the number of blows during the fight and how each body reacts to those blows.....

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: kangaroocourt; martin; trayvon; trayvonstroops; zimmerman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last
That's rich! Can't let a jury see truth. Oh, if you or I were 1/4 or more black, do you think the media would describe us as "white and Hispanic" for a year and a half?
1 posted on 07/08/2013 6:49:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
...Zimmerman, 29, a white and Hispanic neighborhood watch volunteer...

No race-baiting going on here. Nope!

2 posted on 07/08/2013 6:52:16 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (If America is a nation of immigrants, where's my free stuff?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I HOPE THE HISPANICS ARE WATCHIGN WHAT THE DEMOCRAPS ARE DOING HERE!


3 posted on 07/08/2013 6:55:31 PM PDT by Mr. K (There are lies, damned lies, statistics, and democrat talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
...Zimmerman, 29, a white and Hispanic neighborhood watch volunteer...

I thought racial profiling was bad???

4 posted on 07/08/2013 6:55:55 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (This is a sarcasm tag for the retards unable to recognize sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The fact that the prosecution doesn't have a reenactment of their own is telling, in and of itself.
5 posted on 07/08/2013 6:58:06 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (This is a sarcasm tag for the retards unable to recognize sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

They’re even profiling neighborhoods now.


6 posted on 07/08/2013 6:59:02 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (If America is a nation of immigrants, where's my free stuff?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

No way this animation should be allowed - it’s pure speculation. Would they allow the prosecution to do the same? If Zimmerman is on his back, and his holster is in his back waistband, how did Martin know it was there and reach for it? How could Martin do that if he was beating Zimmerman’s head into the ground and holding Zimmerman’s mouth and nose at the same time? How can they allow Martin’s blood tox admitted while Zimmerman wasn’t even tested? Why don’t they present Zimmerman’s past (restraining orders, assault on LEO)?


7 posted on 07/08/2013 7:01:46 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer

The restraining order was a two-way, mutual agreement and the “assault” never led to a conviction, IIRC. I thought courts had ruled in the past that arrests and convictions were two different things and as a rule, arrests were to be kept out of court cases as “previous bad acts” or did I misunderstand that?


8 posted on 07/08/2013 7:06:05 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Sarah Palin's next run. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Still trying to stop Zimmerman from defending himself.


9 posted on 07/08/2013 7:08:14 PM PDT by Wiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“Zimmerman, 29, a white and Hispanic”

http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/saywhat.wav


10 posted on 07/08/2013 7:08:46 PM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer

>> No way this animation should be allowed - it’s pure speculation.

Not speculation — it’s an animation of what Zimmerman said happened.


11 posted on 07/08/2013 7:09:39 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stormer
If Zimmerman is on his back, and his holster is in his back waistband,...

Who said it was in the back?

How could Martin do that if he was beating Zimmerman’s head into the ground and holding Zimmerman’s mouth and nose at the same time?

Who said he did them at the same time?

Do you work for MSNBC?

12 posted on 07/08/2013 7:11:01 PM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stormer

The judge is obviously a shill for Zimmerman.


13 posted on 07/08/2013 7:11:50 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stormer

The State has been “speculating” in this entire trial.
It should be admitted and the jury can decide if is credible or not credible.
That’s what jury’s do.


14 posted on 07/08/2013 7:14:02 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Depends on the crime.


15 posted on 07/08/2013 7:15:12 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stormer
If Zimmerman is on his back, and his holster is in his back waistband, how did Martin know it was there and reach for it?

Zimmerman described, from the very beginning, that his holster was worn on the right side of his body.

How could Martin do that if he was beating Zimmerman’s head into the ground and holding Zimmerman’s mouth and nose at the same time?

I'm not aware of any report of Martin reaching for the pistol while simultaneously covering Zimmerman's nose and mouth; rather, Zimmerman reported that Martin reached for the gun afterward.

Why don’t they present Zimmerman’s past (restraining orders, assault on LEO)?

Restraining orders are irrelevant. People get restraining orders all the time, they are not prima facia evidence of anything, nor does their existence have any probative value. I believe the "assault on an officer" was ultimately dropped and, from what I read of that case, it was pretty ridiculous.

16 posted on 07/08/2013 7:15:23 PM PDT by 101stAirborneVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

So an animation of the what the prosecution said happened would be OK?


17 posted on 07/08/2013 7:16:10 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Sure, but it would have all the believability of Saturday morning cartoons.


18 posted on 07/08/2013 7:17:37 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick
Not speculation — it’s an animation of what Zimmerman said happened.

If that's the case then the animation is effectively Zimmerman's testimony and therefore cannot be admitted unless Zimmerman is put on the stand and allowed to be cross-examined.

19 posted on 07/08/2013 7:19:00 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The state doesn’t want any competition when it comes to animation. They have the monopoly on cartoons when it comes to this case.


20 posted on 07/08/2013 7:20:49 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“Can’t let a jury see truth”

If you believe a cartoon to be truth, then Wilie Coyote ought to be tried for murder.


21 posted on 07/08/2013 7:22:59 PM PDT by at bay ("no warrant shall be issued except upon probable cause")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer

You’re an attorney?


22 posted on 07/08/2013 7:24:26 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Sarah Palin's next run. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: stormer

I don’t see why not. Except that they didn’t produce one, and they have already rested their case.

They would also have had to push it as a “theory” of what transpired, because unlike the defense, the prosecution has no single eyewitness account of what transpired. All the prosecution has are partial accounts, essentially ALL of which corroborate Zimmerman’s first-hand, sworn statement. So anything THEY fill in with IS “speculation”. It may be right, but it IS speculation and the defense WOULD call them on it and make them back it up with PROOF.

Now, consider *why* the prosecution didn’t do an enactment, by considering what an enactment does: it puts a four-dimensional axis on a set of described events and conditions, the four axes being 3D position plus time. The prosecution HAS no plausible theory of what happened that would withstand the rigor of such a storyboard.


23 posted on 07/08/2013 7:25:25 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Do you like NASCAR?


24 posted on 07/08/2013 7:25:43 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MileHi

Zimmerman, in his demonstration, showed that his holster was in the small of his back behind his right hip. And if he had a free hand to reach for his gun, why didn’t he use that hand to fight off his “attacker”? I don’t believe anything he’s said. Martin wasn’t doing anything wrong, and Zimmerman, by his own admission, didn’t identify himself as a block-watch guy - if Martin thought he was about to mugged, why not fight? The irony here is that if Martin had killed Zimmerman, he would have had an excellent case of “stand your ground”.


25 posted on 07/08/2013 7:25:43 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; stormer

Stayed at a Holiday Inn Express...


26 posted on 07/08/2013 7:26:08 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: stormer
No way this animation should be allowed...

I think the animation could be very instructive for the jury, especially if it showed Trayvon, having just acquired two of the ingredients he needed to brew up his batch of "lean", slinking through the neighborhood looking for open bathroom windows where he might be able to slip in and steal the final ingredient, Robitussin with codeine.

It was that suspicious behavior that caught Zimmerman's attention, and Zimmerman was, after all, on patrol because the apartment residents had formed a neighborhood watch after the complex had suffered a rash of burglaries.

27 posted on 07/08/2013 7:26:57 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Am I missing something, didn’t the persecution play the video of Zimmerman’s statement to the Police during their presentation? How is that different? That did not result in Zimmerman having to to take the stand to be cross examined.


28 posted on 07/08/2013 7:28:08 PM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Not true. Zimmerman is the defendant. His sworn statement IS what is assumed to have occurred that night — the “truth standard”, if you will.

The prosecution’s job is to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that something OTHER than what Zimmerman claims is what actually occurred.

Remember, in this country a defendant is assumed innocent until PROVEN guilty.


29 posted on 07/08/2013 7:29:13 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

LOL! Why would I?


30 posted on 07/08/2013 7:29:14 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

We’re. Watching.


31 posted on 07/08/2013 7:29:50 PM PDT by Iron head mike (The government will soon make criminals of us all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: stormer
I don’t believe anything he’s said.

That is your choice. But all can see that you spin a very dishonest account of events.

I DO believe Zimmerman, he has been very credible. You, not so much.

32 posted on 07/08/2013 7:31:39 PM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Sure. That is what juries do. Decide who is telling the truth.


33 posted on 07/08/2013 7:33:57 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: stormer

>> if he had a free hand to reach for his gun, why didn’t he use that hand to fight off his “attacker”?

Hmmm... someone is attacking you, in a manner that causes you to fear that he intends to take your life.

You decide you must defend yourself, and you have two weapons at your disposal — in Z’s case, a fist and a gun.

I was not aware that there is anything in self defense law that specifies which of your available weapons you may use to defend yourself, and which you may not use. In other words, I don’t think you’re obligated to calculate just how *little* force you must apply to succeed. Can you find me a reference?

(And that leaves aside the whole question of whether or not Z’s fist *would have been* adequate defense. Actually, the defense effectively argued, using witnesses, that Z was probably not capable of fighting off St. Trayvon with his hands.)


34 posted on 07/08/2013 7:39:12 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mastador1
...didn’t the persecution play the video of Zimmerman’s statement to the Police during their presentation?

I don't know. If they did, then I believe they absolutely opened the door for the animated presentation of the sequence of events as described by Zimmerman on that video.

35 posted on 07/08/2013 7:40:25 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: stormer

it is no different than an expert drawing on a marker board.

The prosecution will have the opportunity to cross and take it apart if they can. Also, they knew about it BEFORE the trial started.


36 posted on 07/08/2013 7:40:36 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

the prosecution has an opportunity after the defense with rebuttal IF THEY CAN.


37 posted on 07/08/2013 7:42:50 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
If that's the case then the animation is effectively Zimmerman's testimony and therefore cannot be admitted unless Zimmerman is put on the stand and allowed to be cross-examined.

Incorrect!

The prosecution has already played the video taped questioning of Zimmerman from the night of his "detainment," and he is under NO requirement to take the stand.
38 posted on 07/08/2013 7:43:13 PM PDT by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: stormer

hogwash.

Martin was using the concrete as a weapon.

Martin was the one with premeditation by comming back from his house. The cell phone positioning shows zimmerman was not following any more.


39 posted on 07/08/2013 7:44:57 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: stormer

I hate it when people are proven wrong......testimony has already been given that GZ blood tests were negative for alcohol and drugs. Instead of swimming upstream, think of just this........what was George Zimmermans state of mind when he resorted to self-defense and what were Trayvon Martins actions that caused GZ to be in that state of mind.


40 posted on 07/08/2013 7:45:46 PM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

Q: Mr. Expert is there anything that could help you describe these events.

A: yes.

Q: what would that be?

A: a animation of the events

Q: what would an animation reflect?

a; The events described in the documents and depositions and autoposy report.

and so on. Once the foundation is laid the animation comes in.


41 posted on 07/08/2013 7:48:23 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

>> the prosecution has an opportunity after the defense with rebuttal IF THEY CAN.

Yep.


42 posted on 07/08/2013 7:48:35 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

The problem with a lot of evidence (this in particular) is authentication. The best authentication of this simulation evidence is verification from the only person who could testify that it accurately depicts what he observed and experienced, and that is the defendant. I wouldn’t put Zimmerman on the stand to do that, because once he takes the stand, he is open to a wide array of questions the prosecution may ask. The trial is going so well for the defense to date, I wouldn’t risk it.


43 posted on 07/08/2013 7:52:40 PM PDT by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Did you fall and hit your head recently?


44 posted on 07/08/2013 7:53:37 PM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick
-- I was not aware that there is anything in self defense law that specifies which of your available weapons you may use to defend yourself, and which you may not use. In other words, I don't think you're obligated to calculate just how *little* force you must apply to succeed. Can you find me a reference? --

Florida Chapter 776.

That's the statutory language for justified use of force. I notice your hypothetical is premised on fear of death. Reasonably (the jury decides) holding a fear of death is a prerequisite for resort to deadly force. The firing of a firearm in the direction of "the person to be arrested" (read that as "stopped") is always deadly force, see 776.06.

In situations that do NOT involve a reasonable fear of death or serious injury, self defense force MUST be measured. If you are ambitious, look up the jury instructions for additional detail.

45 posted on 07/08/2013 7:54:16 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Wally_Kalbacken

>> The problem with a lot of evidence (this in particular) is authentication.

Be that as it may, it’s not the job of the defense to “up front” authenticate it.

It’s the job of the prosecution to DISauthenticate it. The defense then responds as required to fight off the prosecution’s challenges to Z’s version of events. This has proven to be quite easy to do — the prosecution’s own witnesses have been a great help.

I agree that it would be a bad idea to put Z on the stand. I also don’t think they need to — the prosecution’s case is as weak as they come.


46 posted on 07/08/2013 7:56:36 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Obama, a White and Black, uh Black and White, Community Agitator.


47 posted on 07/08/2013 7:58:59 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (They can follow the Communist, I'll follow the Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

>> In situations that do NOT involve a reasonable fear of death or serious injury

Thanks for the cite. However, if you go back and carefully read my post, in my example I qualified that the hypothetical “victim” did indeed fear for his life.

Back to the case at hand — as I recall there is either case law or it’s written into the law, don’t remember which, that actually RECEIVING significant injuries goes a long way towards justifying FEAR of receiving serious injuries. Right? And that describes Z. Right?


48 posted on 07/08/2013 8:00:20 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

>>testimony has already been given that GZ blood tests were negative for alcohol and drugs.<<

I believe you are wrong about that. Unless the cops arrested Z that night, they had no right to request tests from GZ, although I have not doubt that he would have agreed if they asked him. I believe the testimony showed that the cops had no suspicion that GZ was impaired.


49 posted on 07/08/2013 8:00:25 PM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

>> I notice your hypothetical is premised on fear of death.
Sorry, missed that.


50 posted on 07/08/2013 8:01:03 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson