Bump that!
Posted on 07/10/2013 12:33:25 PM PDT by Errant
The judge in George Zimmerman’s murder trial had a contentious exchange with one of Zimmerman’s defense attorneys Wednesday when he repeatedly objected to her asking his client whether he planned to testify in his own defense.
Judge Debra Nelson reminded Zimmerman that he was not required to testify, but when she asked whether he would like to, defense attorney Don West cut in, “I object your honor.” Nelson overruled his objection before asking again.
“I object to that question — ” West repeated.
“Overruled! The court is entitled to inquire of Mr. Zimmerman’s determination as to whether or not he wants to testify,” Nelson said.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
“No Judge, given your obvious bias against me, I don’t plan to testify beyond all the information I’ve previous supplied in various forms.”
LOL!
That’s probably grounds for appeal right there if she did it in front of the jury. But since I doubt Zimmerman will be convicted then it’s pretty much a moot point.
Pigs should not wear black robes. It makes their snouts look funny...
“If Zimmerman is convicted, the judge asking that question in front of the jury will likely trigger to events:
1. A new trial for Zimmerman and”
I’m with you. This has appeal written all over it if it goes south for Zimmerman.
Or she is trying to make the point to the jury that he is not testifying, over and over again. She did everything except say, "Well if you are innocent, what do you have to hide?"
Increadible. The defense had not even finished calling witnesses. If Zimmerman were to say one thing now, and change his mind later, in response to the witnesses yet to be called, what is the jury to do with that information?
The judge should direct her questions to Zimmerman’s attorney, that’s why he’s there!!
Absolutely. Focusing that much attention on the defendants decision as to whether to testify, especially when there were more defense witnesses to call, would be reversible error in any court in the country.
Ohhhh REALLY? Where? All that I've seen supports Zimmerman's claims 100%.
After seeing a photograph of the subject, it is my professional opinion that this is a man masquerading as a woman. Kinda like a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
As always, Sarah, I agree with YOU. She was practically telling him he had to testify! She wouldn’t let it drop.
Outrageous!
I wish Zimmerman would have said, “Not if you are going to ask the questions”?
I think the jury was out of the room.
Bump that!
Doesn’t matter. There was never a case. The cops proved that from the outset.
LOL...
After seeing a photograph of the subject, it is my professional opinion that this is a man masquerading as a woman. Kinda like a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
“I certainly hope that exchange wasn’t in front of the jury.”
If it wasn’t in front of the jury, there would be no objection.
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.