Posted on 07/05/2013 7:16:21 PM PDT by IChing
After another dramatic day of dicey testimony and legal maneuvers in the George Zimmerman murder trial, the prosecution rested and the judge denied the defense’s request for Judgment of Acquittal based on lack of evidence.
I guess there’s just no way judge Debra Nelson was going to make the call on her own, given the ominous gravity of promised violence and even murder from mobs and mobs of “Trayvonistas.”
The day started out with dishonesty under oath on the witness stand from Trayvon Martin’s mother, Sabrina Fulton, during opening testimony.
When asked, under cross-examination by defense attorney Mark O’Mara, about the first time the audiotape of a witnesses’s 911 call was played for her, Fulton eventually said something utterly preposterous (I’m not merely referring to her claiming that the screams for help on the tape were from Trayvon).
The tape was first played for her, allegedly, at the Sanford mayor’s office in a room full of lawyers and others, including Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump and the mayor of Sanford. O’Mara asked her if anyone in the room had told Ms. Fulton (known by some bloggers as “TradeMom” for trademarking/commercializing her deceased son’s first name) anything regarding the contents of the tape before they played it for her, as a way of preparing her for what she was about to hear. Fulton said no, nobody gave her any indication of the nature of what she was about to hear.
If anyone reading this actually thinks that that gathering of schemers all got together in the mayor’s office to play the tape for Martin’s mother without first at least giving her a description of what it was, where it was from, and why it was important, then I have a health care plan to sell you.
The obvious prevarication didn’t end with that. O’Mara moved on, posing the idea to Fulton that if she were to consider the alternative, that the screams on the tape were not those of Trayvon, then of course she would have to conclude that they were from the accused, George Zimmerman; and therefore that her son had caused his own death–wouldn’t she?. Fulton hemmed and hawed, then indignantly claimed she didn’t understand the question. Where I come from, we call that bovine scat; of course she understood the question. She just refused to answer it, pretending she didn’t get it.
O’Mara then slightly altered the approach, suggesting very gently that it would naturally be her hope that her son would not have caused his own death, wouldn’t it? Fulton again evaded, pretending to need O’Mara to repeat the question and clarify it, which he very politely did. Again, Fulton tried to deflect by defiantly saying she would instead hope that the incident never happened, that her son would still be alive, etc.–and when O’Mara asked one more time, she stubbornly insisted that she didn’t understand the question. O’Mara tenderly gave up, ending his cross-examination there.
Now, before you go thinking O’Mara was some kind of callous bully beating up on a grieving mother who lost a son, be advised that he had tried to open his cross examination with a heartfelt statement of apology for her loss, but that he was cut off mid-sentence by an objection from the prosecution’s table–on the grounds that his gesture was not an actual question to the witness–and judge Nelson sustained the objection. You tell me who is heartless in that exchange.
Trayvon Martin’s older brother, Jahvaris Fulton, then took the stand, and said not what he’d originally said when he’d first heard the tape. He had originally said that he couldn’t say that it was his brother’s voice yelling for help, but in court he testified that it was. O’Mara began a meticulous impeachment of his testimony on a related timeline of a previous statement captured on an audio recording, but judge Nelson interrupted O’Mara and declared the impeachment to be inappropriate, forbidden for O’Mara to carry out.
Next we saw a train-wreck of non-testimony from the Chinese immigrant medical examiner who did the autopsy on Trayvon Martin. It would have been comical if it wasn’t so annoyingly awful and pointless. Dr. Shiping Bao’s English was halting and heavily-accented, which was not the real problem. Incidentally, the state of Florida apparently finds and hires medical examiners (remember Dr. Rao from last week? Rao & Bao, eh) by importing the most culturally-incompatible foreign voodoo practitioners from all corners of the planet, with whom attempting communication is worse than dying itself if you are a creepy-azz, English-speaking cracka such as myself.
From the witness stand, Bao basically tried to hijack the proceedings, going rogue and actually trying to argue about trial procedure and the nature of legal testimony with defense attorney Don West and whoever else might try to get him to cooperate. Instead of just answering questions, Bao wanted to speak up whenever he felt like it, and ask questions of his own! He tried to lecture the court about the way things should go. I was ready to murder the guy myself just to get him off the stand.
Bao balked at answering questions regarding his professional, medical opinion, protesting defiantly that he was under oath (to West, “I’m under oath, do you understand? If I give my opinion, it’s not fact! It’s not fact!”) and that he could change his opinion at any time from what it was weeks ago, to what it was an two days ago, from hour to hour, and so on. Again and again, he tried to interrupt his testimony to pontificate on the difference between opinion and fact, as if the attorneys before him needed to be told. West grew visibly incredulous at the piece of work before him, and made me respect him even more for his sheer patience. Even judge Nelson, normally willing to endlessly indulge any witness’ difficult conduct if it caused problems for the defense, sort of tried to get the guy to shape up.
There came a point where it became apparent that Bao was reading answers to anticipated questions from notes, and West asked him if that was the case. There ensued a standoff among Bao, West, prosecutor De la Rionda, and judge Nelson over whether Bao would/must allow his personal notes made the night before (not the actual official notes from the autopsy) to be seen by the attorneys, and a copy made of them for the court. Bao tried to dig in his heels and insist that they were his notes, that no one else had seen them nor would he surrender them at all. He came across like a rat trapped in an outside cellar window-well, as he looked around in paranoid, smirking anxiety as the lawyers closed in around him to study the notes in his hands, and seize them from him as Nelson declared that he had to give them over.
Defeated on the question of relinquishing control of his notes, Bao sat in brief silence as defense attorneys brought them back to their table and pored over them together. The courtroom was still. Suddenly, Bao blurted into the microphone, “You see something funny there?!” Nelson had to tell him to put a sock in it yet again.
Bao’s testimony continued for another agonizing few years until he was dismissed, the court not having learned anything really except that he claimed not to remember a single detail from the autopsy of Martin, even though he claimed to be the most supremely expert and skilled performer of autopsies the world ’round, having done so many of them that everyone present should listen to his rambling blather. Bao had repeatedly changed his assessment of things such as the injuries to Martin’s hands and knuckles, and the length of time it took from the time of the gunshot to the estimated time Martin finally died. He seemed genuinely irritated that West would try to get him to commit to providing a cogent professional analysis, or an explanation of why he kept changing his opinions.
Whew.
So then it came to a cliffhanger. Mark O’Mara stood before judge Nelson and delivered a magnificent, lengthy monologue, replete with an amazingly detailed recitation of piles and piles of case law and precedents, on the manifold legal reasons why the defense believed that Nelson was obliged to render a Judgment of Acquittal, finding Zimmerman not guilty by directed verdict. That meant that if granted, the defense wouldn’t have to present a case, because the judge would have agreed with O’Mara that there simply wasn’t a valid case made by the prosecution.
O’Mara spoke for a very long time. His brain seems to be some kind of marvel of biology, storing facts from prior cases and collating aspects of the case presently before the court in a compelling, sensitive, urgent and pleasant way. He virtually never had to look down to read from notes or papers, only pausing here and there to recall a name or take a sip of water.
The upshot of O’Mara’s marathon motion was his declaration that the prosecution, even with what facts and evidence presented seen in the light most favorable to the state as is required, had not disproved the defense’s reasonable claim of self-defense. Further, O’Mara argued that no ill-will, hatred, nor depraved mind existed in Zimmerman on the night in question; nor had the state proven any such state of mind, therefore the charge of 2nd degree murder was utterly unfounded and the case should not continue on to the jury.
After one of the prosecuting attorneys (a rather toad-like creature named Mantei) mounted a somewhat sullen and snotty but forcefully-spoken, fairly well-articulated rebuttal to O’Mara’s overture (with obligatory amounts of case law quoted as well), O’Mara took one more run at closing the deal, with yet another masterpiece of speech and reasoned appeal.
No dice. Judge Nelson acted as if she never even considered not letting the case move on to the jury’s deliberations. She let O’Mara finish, then abruptly announced to the court that the case would go on.
I have to confess here, I can’t say I completely blame her for chickening out and putting it on the jury’s shoulders. The case is so highly controversial and potentially explosive that for a moment today, I saw her as a human being with a truly tremendous burden on her shoulders.
But that was only for a moment. I’m now back to seeing her as cravenly and unfairly hostile to the defense all along. She’s probably a lesbetarian, besides.
LOL
"HE" did the correct thing. It was an easy call. Any lawyer who practiced in criminal law (like me) would know that.
As a "practiced in criminal lawyer (like you) would know" you might want to pay attention to realize that the judge "HE" is actually a "SHE" Judge Debra Nelson, albeit likely a lesbetarian as another poster pointed out.
Secondly Judge Debra Nelson is incredibly biased & slanted in this case, ruling non-stop in favor of political show trial for the state, and ruling non-stop against any motions or objections by the defense. If this does not constitute judicial misconduct by an inept, biased & slanted judge, than I don't know what would!
Uncle Chip, you are too much.
Doing my best not to ROTFLMAO!
Porr little St. Skittles got a “boo-boo” on his little knuckles. Such a wonderful preview image of what the prosecution will next claim in cross!
It was a momentary sense of empathy, not a total pass. She sickens me but I caught myself finding that the one prosecutor made an effective grab at keeping the case alive in his rebuttal, and I could see how she was probably thinking that the riots and mayhem and burning cities would be on her. So I thought...she’s only human...then I was immediately back to hating her guts again after she abruptly shot O’Mara down.
will go back and read the last paragraph again, to see if I can wrap my head around your criticism of the article.
Maybe I missed something? Wouldn’t be the first time, you know.
I think you captured the essence of the Bao performance today very well.
It’s hard to say who takes the cake as ME of the week — Bao or Rao???
and he was getting tired == 25 punches is a lot to throw in 40 seconds and his target wouldn’t stay still
It appears that TrayVonn, the non-violent child, was being beaten on his left fist, by Zimmerman’s hard head.
OK, went back. Read it. But don’t quite get your point.
My understanding is that Judge Nelson has until the end of the defense case to decide on the JAO presentation today.
Writer of the article seems to understand the law regarding a directed verdict, and understands her dilemma.
Where am I wrong? I do not enjoy reading commentary where writers have heads like concrete (all mixed up and permanently set).
I like to read commentary from people, who they might have a view, still understand the dynamics of the case, and the political problems faced by the judicial branch.
I feel sorry for her to some extent. No matter what she decides, she is going to be hated by a divided population. I would not enjoy being in her shoes, even though it seems clear to me that there is no case.
Just my opinion, as Bao would say.
Was TM shot through the heart? Would it matter? GZ has injuries that must have occurred prior to the shooting, not after the shooting. Who would call for help? The injured person or the non-injured person?
This case never should have been brought.
Sorry for the missed words. Keyboarding with arthritic fingers is getting harder and harder.
There should have been “while” stuck in between “who & they”.
Expect more of that from me in the coming years. Some of my fingers don’t work that well any more, and let’s not comment on my brain, ok?
RIghtwardHo was a prosecutor in the Third Reich of America: Fairfax County, Virginia, where the courts and the prosecutors are practically a single organism. It’s no surprise he chimes in here with supporting words for Judge Nasty.
RIghtwardHo not only was in full support of charging Zimmerman in the first place, he opined that if this case had landed on his own desk, he would have gone after Zimmerman too.
counsil should be counsel. My glasses broke today.
A good Lawyer would probably not refer to the Judge as “he” when the Judge is a female.
We will have MANY more Dr Bao’s and Rao’s practicing in the New USSA in the coming years, “thanks” to Obamacare. If you need it, get your surgery now rather than later! /s;)
Judge John Goodman....
Yes the hollow point bullet went right through his heart according to what I heard from the medical examiner today. Those bullets make a big hole. Blood pressure would drop immediately in 10-15 seconds. There is no way he could scream loudly again and again.
I shoulda been a lawyer!
I guessing it's a little late and you meant "George".
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.