Posted on 07/10/2013 5:15:07 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Today, July 10th, is DAY #22 (of 5th week) State of Florida V. George Zimmerman case.
Yesterday began with a boom as defense expert witness, world renowned Dr Vincent Di Maio took to the stand to validate the forensic evidence supporting George Zimmerman’s version of the encounter with Trayvon Martin. However, the day ended with an even bigger THUNDERCLAP in an epic 10pm showdown as Don West took on both the State prosecutors and trial Judge Nelson after the jury was released. Ending with Judge Nelson, turning her back and walking out of court. Unreal. A great analysis of the events from yesterday is available HERE.
The late night argument, not by the State, but by Judge Nelson herself, regarding phone evidence authentication, is so weak and insufferably devoid of legal analysis it is absurd on its face. Then again, this is the same judge who said a few days ago, flippantly in open court, that evidence should be “shredded” (Dr. Bao notes) after use. D’oh
Essentially Nelson argued that the phone records (texts and pics from Trayvon) cannot be authenticated to have originated by the specific personage of Trayvon Martin (despite two security codes) because anyone could have sent them. Whiskey*Tango*Foxtrot !!
How can an email be used in a sex offender case? How can phone records be used in RICO cases? How can GPS evidence be used in Insurance Cases? How are photographs taken by perps used against them? Think about it.
You can’t argue that evidence cannot be admitted because someone else might have made the actual phone call; Someone else might have physically sent the email; Someone else actually accessed the website; Someone else might have been the driver of the car; Or, someone else could possibly have been behind the viewing lens of the camera etc.
No, that argument does not mean you can arbitrarily exclude evidence. And this was the basis for her argument (watch the video).
Sure, that’s an argument which can be presented to the jury by the other side, as a counter point to create doubt with the jury, but it can’t be a reasonable consideration for total evidence exclusion. Then again, this is Judge Nelson – who in multiple prior cases has a high historical propensity of being overruled by the 5th District Court of Appeals.
It should be noted the NAACP Annual National Convention starts in Orlando on Friday; Additionally, preparations are being made in/around Miami-Dade for a Wednesday defense wrapped up with a community/LEO preparation meeting yesterday.
yes, the JUDGE could grant an appeal bond.
“Yeah...I’m curious as to how many people are dead from the one-punch knockout-king game the hood rats like to play.”
The hood rats are playing a different game now. They’re shoodting white(hispanic) babies in strollers near Atlanta.
Am I to believe the stand your ground law is different in FL than it is in TX?
In TX, stand your ground law refers to anyone who has a legal right to physically be where they are.
Is FL stand your ground only allowed in the home or vehicle?
And Obama’s boss.
More like copycat behavior. These folks ain’t the brightest bulbs in the stadium. A conspiracy is beyond their grade point average.
heavy drinker? smoker?
Manslaughter is a “lesser included charge” to murder 2 in Florida, which means that it’s automatically on the table.
I think what will happen is that in their closing arguments both pro and defense will “suggest” what instructions they’d like the judge to give the jury, including about the charges. Then the judge will weigh that with the law and instruct the jury.
Here’s a link to a pretty good article on the legal doctrine behind the charges in this trial, although I DO NOT AGREE with the author’s conclusion that killing Skittles was unwarranted.
“Bernie is standing up again looking at the dummy on the floor - Perfect time to pants him again.”
Or give him a wedgie.
And remember the shirt testimony....it's a no brainer.
The prosecutions story doesn't fit.
The lack of a legal training and practice requirement for supreme court justices in one of the checks and balances built into the constitution.
The founders imagined there could come a day that the legal profession as a whole could become corrupt and try to seize powers from the people for the exclusive use of its members.
How silly all those racist dead white guys were.
Between that and Bammy's statement ("If I had a son..."), looks like GZ has a great Section 1983 civil suit against the Feds.
Would just love to see it taken away. And regardless of what everyone else say, I believe it could happen and that’s why the insurance people settled.
*********************************************************************
I think the reason the homeowner’s insurance company settled was because they were aware of the very cozy relationship between the Sanford city “manager” (he of the “let’s play the 911 tapes in my office and, by the way, none of you damn cops allowed) and the “crump/trayvon crew”. If they would have held out until they saw how this criminal trial had progressed, they’d not have settled or, perhaps, settled for a pittance.
>> This is the Home of Over the Top.
uh... didn’t you say you had some lawn to mow, Mr. Thread Proctor?
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
“I wonder how much that exhibit cost the taxpayers of the Florida?”
Who went into the adult bookstore to buy it?
Unbelievable...not.
And the other link on that thread about the Black Panther Party? Very troubling.
“no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.”
It is more than that in my humble non-attorney opinion. The defense just connected the reason the text messages are critical to Zimmerman's defense to actual testimony which brings it out of the hypothetical and into reality.
I'm assuming the defense probably knew it would be hard to authenticate the evidence in at this late date and is setting the stage for obtaining a retrial based on the failure of the judge to give adequate time to prepare and that the evidence directly affecting certain testimony.
In a real trial, my guess is these points would cause the prosecutor to agree to some assault charge of disturbing the peace if they knew they were facing at best a guilty plea that could cause a retrial where the defense would have more time to sharpen its case the second time around.
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.