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.
Do what you have to do “tough” guys. LOL. Big mouth little bitches.
When she asked Zimmerman if he wanted to testify it was not in front of the Jury.
What would this have to do with Zs case ?
Per WFTV the John Donnelly matter will be handled later today.
Prayers up for your daughter, SIN and grand babies.
Sorry to read this Donna.
P.S. The reason BDLR didn’t bring up Pollock’s TWITTER ACCOUNT during TRIAL...
(Remember, the Judge specifically and repeatedly asked DEFENSE if they were ‘resting’)
...is that he would have opened the way for Defense to bring in Trayvon Martin’s Twitter account.
So, he had to wait until DEFENSE was DEFENSELESS before trying to bring up to try and impeach the witness.
So now, O’Mara’s only recourse was to object. He even knew it was coming.
Most of this case has been about the state violating just about every court rule there is.
no. local news (and friends emailing) are beginning to report it.
That is scary. Will pray for her safety.
“Which side of Sandusky?”
I’m in Northern Summit county. The part that juts into Cuyahoga. Halfway between Cleveland and Akron.
I DO highly recommend all law abiding citizens arms themselves though. This is how we defeat the thugs of the world. We can’t wish them away or even reason with them. You cannot reason with the unreasonable.
Which time? She asked twice.
The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which are codified in U.S. Code, guarantee a criminal defendant’s constitutional rights. States have their own rules of criminal procedure but all are modeled after the federal rules and cannot provide less protection than the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
The trial judge is responsible for ensuring that the rules of criminal procedure are followed. Since a defendant has a 5th Amendment right not to incriminate himself, the trial judge must ensure that the defendant knows his constitutional rights and is exercising those rights of his own free will. (i.e. not threatened or bribed, etc.)
So, the answer to both of your questions is yes. It is both statutory law (enacted to ensure constitutional rights are afforded through state criminal procedure) and SOP.
I'll go farther than that. Given the information that came out today about the Collusion between the DOJ and the Al Sharpton mobfest to bring the charges in the first place, She has had extreme pressure put on her by Eric Holder's office and the Idiot that filed the charges to get this case to the Jury so they can be pressured to vote guilty.
Stay safe spacejunkie2001.
Could you tell me how many miles are between Sanford and Miami. My son is working on a film there and he is living about 30 minutes north of downtown Miami. I’m going to send him an email when the jury goes into deliberation and when the verdict comes out. He’s been living in London for over 20 years and he doesn’t know how bad it could get there - he feels detached from it and that’s bad.
Keep pushing her to arm herself. She can’t dismiss it as if/when it hits the fan, who is going to protect her??
If GZ gets acquitted, the first thing I would do is move the hell out of Floriduh. It is corrupt to the core.
He needs to stay out of Liberty City
Does Pollock own the gym, or simply work there?
Yup. I rechecked. She asked at the proper time, but she also asked earlier, and it appears the Jury was there.
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.