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.
Perhaps the plan from holder all along is to nullify the Florida stand your ground law by ignoring it and rushing to manslaughter for NAY shooting regardless of how real the self defense issue.
O’Mara: The prosecution has presented no evidence that proves murder. I ask for dismissal.
The MANTISS: Judge, we have all this ‘evidence’ and stuff. I say, GUILTY, PEACE, OUT.
Judge: (reading from the script). I find there is enough circumstantial evidence and twitter rumors to justify continuing. Denied.
The jury returning to hear the defense rest officially and then tells jury that certain exhibits were put into evidence.
The DOJ voice in her earpiece is telling her to rap this up.
Now Mantei doing the questioning. I guess Bernie is too pissed to talk.
State’s firs rebuttal witness is Adam Pollock — gym owner
The 7-11 vid...and what else?
She has a speaking slot at the NAACP convention next week. :)
Surely it has nothing to do with the 2013 NAACP National Convention July 13-17 occurring 25 miles down the road in Orlando.
Great, forehead soul patch is testifying. I agree with MOM, this isn’t rebuttal.
Is this the guy who said Z was soft?
Pollock being brought back in.
I wonder if the IRS has had time to threaten to take away his gym if he doesn’t ‘cooperate’ with the Prosecution.
I’m heartsick over the whole thing for so many reasons
Talking heads..this is not part of rebuttal
Should be handled on cross, not rebuttal. Typical BS by this pansies.
Yes.
Why the hurry? The NAACP convention is in Orlando this year. It starts In three days. That’s one theory ..am sure there are others.
I think they did that on purpose knowing full well it was not rebuttal
The evidence before the court is incontrovertible.
There's no need for the jury to retire.
In all my years of judging, I have never heard before
of someone more deserving of the full penalty of law.
-PJ
Me too.
They’re saying this is not proper rebuttal, but impeachment and should have been handled in cross-examination. But, bell has been rung...
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.