Posted on 06/25/2013 9:59:18 AM PDT by MNDude
Prosecutors in the Florida murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman will reveal a star witness for the first time on Tuesday, the girl Trayvon Martin was talking with in the last minutes of his life.
The teenage girl, known as Witness #8 until now, was due to testify about what Martin, the unarmed black 17-year-old shot and killed by Zimmerman last year, told her what he saw that night.
Identified in court on Monday only as Rachel, a friend of Martin from Miami, she received a running account about what was happening, starting when he noticed a man, Zimmerman, watching him in the gated central Florida community he was visiting.
Zimmerman, 29 and part Hispanic, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the February 26, 2012, killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.
The racially charged case triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system, since police did not arrest Zimmerman for 44 days.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Rules of court will be that the Defense would have had this information. Will be interesting to see.
It’s an exception to the hearsay rule. It will come in under “present sense impression” or “excited utterance.” There are others but those will suffice.
While I don’t know the FL State rules, the exceptions to hearsay are pretty common across the board. Here’s a link to the Federal Rule which all the States pretty much follow. Hope that helps:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_803
Problem with the cell phone is that while undergoing forensics by the prosecution, it mysteriously had most of it’s data deleted - Gee whiz, we’re so sorry and can’t imagine how that happened, wink, wink and we’re also sorry we, uh, forgot to give the phone to the defense for like forever. Just like so much of the manufactured lies and inuendoes in this case. Heck, the prosecution as lied on DeeDee’s age at least three times in their filings so it’s a guarantee she’s going to spew nothing but lies on the stand.
Since they got slapped down over portraying him as a big mean white racist dude, they have to play another angle. The stereotype for Hispanic is hot tempered so that's what caused him to shot a poor widdle defenseless kid who was doing nothing but walking home eating Skittles. Notice the msm stay far, far away from his grandma who was part black.
Remember ABC put a LARGE logo across the screen and jiggled the video of him being brought into the police station so their viewing audience wouldn't get a good look at his wounds. They goofed up not ending the video before it showed the officers casually wandering around without any concern that the big mean perp would make a run for it. The behavior of the cops as they went into the building and letting Zimmerman tag along was very telling they fully understood he was the victim.
Excellent question.
Rules would also prohibit the testimony of an unnamed witness who could not be vetted by the defense prior to trial. Does she have a criminal record? Don’t know, she doesn’t even have a name.
I’m sure that will be reliable testimony....I dunno. A phone conversation, EVEN IF VERIFIED A PHONE CONVERSATION TOOK PLACE, used to be hearsay. Good thing I ain’t a cop anymore, I’d shoot some of my partners for placing this out there. But that’s jes’ me.
Who says it was an excited utterance? Some broad who was paid off by an Black activist? I believe excited utterance is relevant to a cop, lawyer, or prosecuter hearing it. Not some friend of yours. Besides, if it was an excited utterance, why turn around, go back and attack the person you were talking about?
I'm not a lawyer, but I know that one can testify as to the state of mind of another person. According to the Wikipedia page on hearsay, the federal rules of evidence allow for many exceptions to the hearsay rule, including "dying declarations".
Maybe she’ll make it to the stand today we’ll see.
Trayvon Martin may not have been a perfect personality, but none of those pictures involves a capital offense.
In Florida, it is indeed a capital offense to attack a gun owner/concealed permit holder, since they are allowed to shoot you in self defense.
Just like it’s a capital offense to break into the home of a gun owner. You are likely to get summary judgement of death.
Rachel Gentil or Jenteel(sp?) has already gone down in flames when the state was forced to admit that she is a liar!
On the famous phone call made by Crump to Rachel (dee-dee) while Matt Gutman(ABC news) was there, she said that she did not go to Martin’s funeral. She claimed to have been so overwrought with grief that it put her in the hospital.
(this all sounded too much like made up drama)
So O’Mara/West axted fo dem medical records fum Crump/hospital/State/..
The state went to hemming n hawing about it, and finally was forced to admit that there were no records, since Rachel just made that part up.
And then there is the issue of pretending Rachel Gentil is a minor which prevented access to her and her story.
While the pictures presented may successfully tear down the “innocent choir boy” image of Martin peddled by his supporters, none of the them is evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman.
I think it’s well established that TM attacked GZ.
The state will have to justify that attack by saying GZ started it.
The state will not deny that TM attacked GZ, unless they are foolish.
The Spontaneous Statement exception to the Hearsay rule has been around for years. It is when the person testifying in court as to the content of the hearsay is testifying to an unavailable persons out of court statements which describe or narrate a relevant series of events at or near the time they occurred. Now that I state it I can’t remember now if the person relating the hearsay must have been relating what a percipient witness saw I think so. In this case Martin would be a percipient witness narrating an ongoing event to the “mystery” witness. I’m aware of a case where the judge admitted a witness’ testimony where the witness was relating a description by a missing percipient witness as to how an accident occurred. If I have not grossly forgotten the rule I think the girls testimony is admissible. In a real world this girls credibility would be zero. I guess Florida allows depositions in criminal cases and this girl if I remember correctly was hidden from the defense-with the courts approval!
But , IF the verbal testimony hadn’t been tainted/destroyed by the prosecurtor’s office by State approved technicians,,
wouldn’t that fact be presented to the jury as well ?
Since the State destroyed any evidence of the existance / truth of that testimony , doesn’t that weaken the testimony of ‘Dee Dee’/ Rachel ?
I don’t understand what you are saying. Do you mean the “mystery witness” taped her conversation with Martin and the tape ended up destroyed?
The evidence containeed on the cellphone would either proove , or disproove ‘Dee Dee / Rachel’s testimony .
Is it appropriate to ask ‘Dee Dee’ how many times she met with spoke with Crump or State Proseceutors Office in preparation for giving testimony ?
Is it appropriate to ask how Crump contacted her , and how he learned about her existance ,and when he learned it ?
One of the things that I remember when ‘Dee Dee first came up is that she was ‘unavaiable’, as Crump indicated she was a minor.
My understanding is that she is significantly older than orgininally indicated by Crump .
Doesn’t this age issue discredit Crump ? and /or her current testimony ?
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.