Do you want soup with those crackers Miss?
Posted on 06/29/2013 2:38:26 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
Following opening statements, the prosecution normally produces a succession of fact witnesses, people who can testify to the facts–the evidence–necessary to establish the elements of the offense and to prove that the defendant committed it.
Their ultimate job is to leave no room for reasonable doubt. But this is the George Zimmerman prosecution: the backwards case.
Normally, prosecutors are careful to fully question each prosecution witness, to obtain all of the evidence their testimony can produce, and also to avoid allowing the defense to reveal evidence left unmentioned, making it look like the prosecution was trying to conceal something.
But during the first week of this case, the prosecution has established a pattern of asking only the bare minimum of their witnesses.
In virtually every case, defense cross-examination reveals a great deal the prosecutors avoided bringing to light, and in virtually every case, that information either fully supports George’s Zimmerman’s account–which has not changed–casts doubt on The Narrative–which is actually the prosecution’s case–or both.
This bizarre turn of events has required the prosecutors, particularly Bernie de la Rionda (hereinafter BDLR) to treat his own witnesses as though they are hostile witnesses.
The prosecution has actually engaged in the extraordinary spectacle of aggressively questioning its own witnesses, trying to get them to ignore, disown or soft-pedal their testimony.
Another interesting–and disturbing–pattern established by prosecution witnesses is changing their testimony in significant and ethically questionable ways.
A number of prosecution witnesses have testified to important changes in their accounts that they have never said before, not in multiple law enforcement interviews or depositions.
This directly suggests that they’ve not only been coached, but perhaps the subordination of perjury is involved.....
I expected that [DeeDee] would not help the State’s case, but she went far beyond that and badly damaged it. During her first day of testimony, she was actively hostile to the defense. Her rudeness and glaring lack of respect for the dignity of the court left me slack jawed.
That kind of behavior would cause anyone to spend time in jail for contempt in virtually any court in the land, and rightfully so, yet not only did Judge Nelson ignore her conduct, she actually protected her from the defense on several occasions.
The truth is coming out without him having to testify and your agenda is showing.
mice
Do you want soup with those crackers Miss?
Yup.
Yes. The classic signature of a propagandist media.
I owe an apology to the German people of the early and middle '30s.
The prosecution-friendly side of the political spectrum has tried to conflate Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law with the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case, but that law is not even applicable here.
Since Zimmerman was on his back on the ground being assaulted, standing his ground was a non-issue, since retreat under such a circumstance was not practical. Thus the "stand your ground" doctrine does not apply, and will not be raised by either the defense or the prosecution. Consequently, the case straightforwardly reduces down to the use of deadly force in self-defense against a violent, criminal assault.
I don't expect any race riots in the event of an acquittal, unless the black leadership and population in this country is significantly more irresponsible than I imagine. The facts of this case are much less ambiguous than those which have triggered such unrest in the past.
The prosecution probably doesn't even believe the Narrative, and notwithstanding that its refutation will be unsettling to those who are propagating it, I believe the black community will ultimately be forced to accept the inconvenient truth before any significant violence erupts. The black leadership will hopefully face the political realities of the situation, and not be exposed as utter fools for fanning the flames of racial animus in a case where it's not even remotely justified.
I thought the same thing about federal civil rights charges being brought against Zimmerman. But I was reminded by a defense lawyer that the FBI already looked at this case and determined that there was not a racial crime - so I’m hoping there won’t be federal charges like the rodney king cops faced.
Indeed.
Back in the day when I was a police officer, my partner and I caught a burglar as he was climbing out of a back window of a store, into an alley-way. He was on store video as well.
He hit the ground and we immediately arrested him.
17-yr old black thug.
When his mama came to the police department she was adamant he wasn’t guilty, had not done a darned thing wrong, you see; “I don’t care if you saw him do it or if you have video, if he said he didn’t do it. . .HE DIDN’T DO IT.”
There was no convincing her otherwise. Seriously.
You are right, facts be darned for some people. Facts are what they want them to be, not what reality shows to be true.
All that I can say is with people like the IRS folks and prosecutors like the ones trying to railroad Zimmerman, much of our government is now our enemy...worse even than during the revolutionary time period. We are in for some really rough times.
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.