Zimmerman will be acquitted. Judge Nelson's attempt to force him to testify tells us so.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Judge Debra Nelson has behaved like a partisan hack the entire trial. Her asking George if he wanted to testify was beyond unusual. It was tantamount to jury tampering.

She wouldn't have done any of this if the trial were going the way she wanted it to.

[BlackElk]

Just another one of the promised 72 virgins (together with Helen Thomas and Madeleine Albright) and every bit as brilliant as she is lovely.

[laplata]

Ozzie Osborne is a pig.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Yes you are lucky. The area around the airport and downtown Atlanta are really no go zones if you are white. I have not been to downtown Atlanta in 15 years. Will not go there. We CCW everywhere.

Night of the verdict we are going to LAL and hunker down at home.

[novemberslady]

Her asking George if he wanted to testify was beyond unusual.

What she did wasn't normal.
If she had waited, there wouldn't be a problem.

Nope that first time I thought she was pressuring Zimmerman to testify.
To me she seemed really upset that he didn't.

[Jaded]

Seriously? She did this in front of the jury?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

If she had waited, there wouldn't be a problem.

If she had only asked once, even if she asked at the wrong time, there wouldn't be a problem.

Asking multiple times, implying to the jury that there was something sinister in his declining to testify, is a big problem.

Can judges be disbarred?

[Sarah Barracuda]

From what I understand the jury was NOT present during this time

[tanknetter]

I have only seen small segments of the GZ trial, but “Judge” Nelson strikes me as one of the worst judges in history.

She's a horrible judge, but pretty smart from a self-interest/self-preservation standpoint.

It's clear that she just wants this off her plate as quickly and as cleanly (to her culpability ... and personal safety) as possible.

If the jury acquits, it's not going to be because she stood in the way of the prosecution making its case (to the detriment of the defendant). If they convict, Zimmerman has a lot of grounds for appeal ... and the socio/political consequences (read: riots) get deferred until the mess is in the laps of the appeals court, which can then take the blame (assuming they overturn).

[supercat]

If they convict, Zimmerman has a lot of grounds for appeal ... and the socio/political consequences (read: riots) get deferred until the mess is in the laps of the appeals court, which can then take the blame (assuming they overturn).

I wouldn't be surprised if Judge Nelson would rather have the appeals court vacate a finding of guilt (forbidding a retrial) rather than remand the case (allowing a retrial), even though the former course of action should be a stronger rebuke. After all, in the former situation, the appeals court would be seen as the entity which freed Zimmerman, while in the latter scenario the trial court would be stuck having to deal with the case again.

[BunnySlippers]

You forgot the link. Or is this a vanity?

[supercat]

Hey! You’re using logic! No fair!

No fair to whom? Some of the "Traybots" claim that Zimmerman's going to walk because the prosecutors are throwing the case. I don't think there's any way that the facts of the case support a conviction, and I suspect 99% of those claiming the prosecutor's throwing the case have no clue as to what it should be doing, but from an objective standpoint I nonetheless think that the "Traybots" are correct in claiming that the prosecutor is doing a far less effective job of handling the case than a competent prosecutor should be able to do.

Suppose that the prosecutor had called only those witnesses necessary to prove the points mentioned above. In the absence of any evidence to show self-defense, those points would on the face of it be sufficient to prove second-degree murder. Of course, the prosecution couldn't stop the defense from calling its own witnesses for the purpose of showing self-defense, but its questioning would be subject to the rules of direct examination, rather than cross-examination. Further, if the prosecutor's goal was to show that Zimmerman's statements at various points in the process weren't 100% consistent, it could do so in the rebuttal phase.

[tioga]

When the judge first asked, the defense had not ended it’s case. West objected and she overruled him. The judge does have to ask Zimmerman formally if he understands his right to testify or not to testify and that he has made his own decision. She does not have the right to hound him before the appropriate time and West called her out on it. More theater from JudgeBatSh!tCrazy.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I opened it in chat. By definition that’s a vanity.

[JouleZ]

I guess I’m lucky he didn’t do more damage but I still think he’s lucky I didn’t have my weapon with me.....broad daylight in front of the Hilton Hotel downtown about 17 years ago. Love Georgia, especially Jekyll Island but no way will I ever return to Atlanta. Stay safe GG2.

[tioga]

Jury was gone, but she did it on live TV. JudgeCrazyBitch is great theater, too bad George’s life is on the line.

[novemberslady]

I was referring to the Defense attorneys objection.
She should have waited when the attorney said his case was still ongoing, instead of being obnoxious and rude.

Asking twice would've been alright, but not the way she did it.
Nelson really appeared to be attempting to railroad Zimmerman.
It was not up to her to push an end to the defense today.

[novemberslady]

JudgeCrazyBitch

funny stuff :)

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Then we are in agreement.

[fso301]

LOL!