Posted on 07/10/2013 5:55:51 AM PDT by servo1969
In my post last night I noted a near shouting match between defense attorney Don West and Judge Debra Nelson over whether text messages on Trayvon Martin’s phone regarding fighting were “authenticated.”
Judge Nelson stated that there was no evidence that Trayvon typed the texts even though the messages were on his phone and stored in double-password protected format using phone apps. Judge Nelson read from the bench from what appeared to be a treatise on evidence.
The defense countered that its computer forensic expert, who testified, was able to track hundreds if not thousand of text messages on the phone and that the flow of conversations indicated it was Trayvon in context. The defense also vigorously complained that because the State held back evidence and the defense’s request to postpone the trial was denied, the defense did not have the time to track down and call as witnesses the people with whom Trayvon was texting to personally authenticate the conversations.
Although we will not get her ruling until after court starts this morning, it appears that Judge Nelson is on the verge of reversible error if she excludes the text messages on authentication grounds (there may be other grounds to exclude them, I’m just dealing with authentication).
A reader forwarded to me the case of State v. Lumarque, 44 So.3d 171, Fla.App. 3 Dist.,2010, in which a Florida appeals court reversed a trial court’s decision to exclude text messages on authentication grounds. Here’s the pertinent part of the holding (emphasis mine):
On the appeal, we conclude the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that exhibits 5-9 and 11-15 are not admissible in the trial of this case. The State sought to admit into evidence two sexually suggestive images and eleven text messages between the ex-wife and a boyfriend, found on the defendant’s cellular telephone. The ex-wife testified that prior to the assault by the defendant, he showed her the two images and one of the text messages. There also is evidence in the record from which one might infer the defendant examined the ex-wife’s cellular telephone on the morning or afternoon before the alleged incident when he was alone in the house for a brief period after returning their children back to his ex-wife’s home.
At an in limine hearing, the trial court found the two images and one text message the ex-wife testified to admissible, but concluded the remaining exhibits inadmissible as the ex-wife could not authenticate them. The court erred. The images and text messages were found on the defendant’s cellular telephone, seized pursuant to a search of the defendant’s home through a warrant shortly after the alleged incident. This fact, testified by the State’s forensics expert, is sufficient to authenticate these exhibits. U.S. v. Caldwell, 776 F.2d 989, 1001-02 (11th Cir.1985) (holding that authentication of evidence merely requires a finding that the evidence is what it purports to be). It also is immaterial that the ex-wife could not identify each of the messages being shown to her on the night of the incident. Regardless how these images and text messages might have found their way onto the defendant’s cellular telephone, the State has presented sufficient evidence at this stage that these exhibits constitute evidence of motive. Craig v. State, 510 So.2d 857, 863 (Fla.1987) (stating that evidence of motive is admissible when it would help the jury understand other evidence). Accordingly, they are admissible into evidence at the trial of this case upon the State laying the proper predicates as indicated by this opinion….
As much as the State wants to keep out the text messages, reversible error due to an improper authentication ruling is not the way to go.
This one is allowing defense witnesses, and is being televised for all to see. Otherwise...
I saw this, and it succinctly describes the prosecutions strategy:
“the prosecution is simply trying to show reasonable doubt as to Zimmerman’s innocence.”
I know virtually nothing about legal procedures, so when you say, “reversible error”, what does that mean?
Nope.
I personally feel she and Angela Corey may be more than just friends and the visual on that is sick making.
Depends on politics.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/07/05/thats-my-boy-now-wheres-my-money-wheres-my-benjamins/
The consistent stance of the court seems to be that Trayvon Martin is the defendant with a presumption of innocence and that George Zimmerman is a prosecutor trying to prove Martin’s guilt in order to justify self-defense.
The judge f****d up, and the verdict is reversed by a higher court? That's my semi-edumacated guess.
Don’t forget the crazy Medical Examiner Valeria Rao. She’s under investigation for very bizarre behavior. The only reason she has that job is government officials, the same people that are involved in the Zimmerman case.
Really? This morning?
Were the jurors in court? Have they at least seen and heard the defense arguments for cell phone records?
I hope so. The very fact the judge wants to deny the jurors relevant evidence is enough to provoke the jury into making the right call here.
Not Guilty.
I wasn’t aware of that!
Wondering how long my tagline has been screwed up??? Fixing it.
Yep.
Praying faithfully for GZ.
I’m a little behind on the whole text argument here. Are Martin’s texts just now being turned over?
Complaints for over 10 years and she’s the Jacssonville ME.
It’s a form of gun control.
What good is concealed carry if you’re being beaten and fear for your life and you can’t use the weapon to defend yourself?
Mostly it was an election year attempt to motivate blacks and make them feel they are oppressed, etc. to get them to vote. Motivate the base.
If Zimmerman is convicted, the defense can use this judge’s rulings in their appeal.
Anyway, she did allow the defense to use the animation piece in their closing. Dis-allowing the incriminating text messages of Martin was a huge blunder by the judge and may come back to haunt her.
All that said, it would take an act of the devil for that jury to convict Zimmerman.
The defense did submit this as part of their motion. I heard the judge reference it this morning. In her verbal “sustained” she gave no reason.
The defense did submit this as part of their motion. I heard the judge reference it this morning. In her verbal “sustained” she gave no reason.
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.