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.
Hot Mike at the wftv live feed site. Too many folks talking at once to know what’s going on.
>> I wonder when the last time someone threw her a bone?
I wonder if she even *likes* bones. I have my doubts.
This could be interesting. MOM has spotted the missing dragon scale. The weakest link in the mail, if you will. He wants to jerk the judge's chain to keep the rebuttal witness out, so he doesn't threaten her integrity (because she has none) but instead holds the shiv to her precious schedule! I think I love this tactic!
This good fellow *adapts.*
Judge said state goes on Thursday, defense on Friday. Then jury instructions. What rebuttal? to closing?
>> I believe it is called surrebuttal
Or ThatsRetardedSurrebuttal
Now that you have mentioned “hoodies”, I want to confess I have ordered a hoodie - a dark navy blue one. I felt it was the proper thing to do to be in fashion.
Yes, after RC’s post I looked it up. I can’t tell if it applies here. IANAL, and further IDKSAF (I Don’t Know S*** About Florida).
>> It’s my one frivolity I do on the thread.
That, and the lawn mowing. And the cats. You tried to get us to post lolcats.
Other than that, you’re doing a pretty good job. :-)
Typically, the Defense notifies the Court of their intent to rest. The Court typically notifies the Defense that it will ask the defendant if he wants to testify on his own behalf or not.
Never, ever have I seen a judge interrogate a criminal defendant (before the Defense is finished presenting its case) about whether or not he has made a decision and how much more time he needs to make said decision. Simply unheard of in my experience.
IANAL, however, it seems to me that Judge Nelson denied GZ his constitutional right to legal counsel during that interrogation because she overruled West’s objections and seemingly forced GZ to answer her without consulting his attorneys.
The State intended to call three rebuttal witnesses. They improperly called one with the intent to impeach, which is not allowed on rebuttal. Nelson sustained the Defense’s objection. Then the State declined to call anymore rebuttal witnesses.
I believe you are mistaken. MOM would not have objected to that schedule, but he objected because the rebuttal and jury instructions were to be the Friday circus leaving the Thursday late in the day defense closing to be lost in fatigue.
Hot mike on wftv. Presser?
*******************************
Live now—MOM
Got rained out from mowing now - I HATE cats. MOM Presser
>> I felt it was the proper thing to do to be in fashion.
I think hoodies are a good idea. Crackas included. I think I have one laying around somewhere. Sorry, I mean “layuh roun sumwheres”.
Did you get one with pockets, so you have a place to stash your camera, cellphone, and some extra shotgun shells? :-)
That would be bad. Very bad.
>> Got rained out from mowing
Lucky You!
Self defense applies to Manslaughter as well as Murder 2. Missed the beginning. Will he argue against offering Manslaughter. WILL be using the animation in his closing.
GZ is worried.
That doesn't mean it is not noticed when she fails to give into the prosecution's B.S.
I'm amazed the prosecutors can say what they do, with a straight face. It may have been this, it may have been that, no one can say...but Zim may be guilty, so declare him guilty(?). That is BACKWARDS.
How could the judge not see that? She could have just agreed, and saved the jury the trouble, and Zim, the risk of a jury falsely convicting him on lesser charge. But that's been the prosecution's game all along. Throw mud. Confuse and throw out reasons for doubt. It may have been this, it may have been that. If your Aunt had balls she'd be your transsexual uncle.
How can a man be convicted on doubt towards possibility of guilt? They need to prove beyond reasonable doubt (AFAIK).
Whatever happened to the principle of truth being above and beyond the adversarial nature? I suppose it depends on where one decides to cut it. The "cut here" line repeatedly chosen by the prosecution indicate to me there is little or no real truth within members of the prosecution as individuals, and the D.A.'s "office" as institution either.
Government is nobodies friend, other than those employed by it? Just hang on, don't buck the system (even when it's wrong) and wait for FAT retirement.
>> leaving the Thursday late in the day defense closing to be lost in fatigue.
Good! I hoped defense wouldn’t be doing their closing arguments in the afternoon... after lunch... when everyone is at their attention peak (ha ha).
Was he successful? When is defense close tentatively scheduled?
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.