Posted on 07/05/2013 4:54:41 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Today, July 5th, is DAY #19 (of 4th week) State of Florida V. George Zimmerman case.
The State is expected to wrap up their case today – A great recap of the trial so far is available HERE: The key witness today expected to be Sybrina Fulton, mom.
Great Expectations? Remember, as y’all have noted during the 15+ months of research, there is so much corruption in the assembly of this case we could expect the State to avoid the traditional witnesses brought by normal prosecutions. We have not been disappointed in our predictions. The state has already won a pre-trial motion to bar the defense mentioning the absence of any witness from the State’s case.
So it comes as no surprise, not a single State investigator has been called, not a single FBI officer, only one local investigative detective, Chris Serino (who supported the defense), and now the profound possibility they won’t even present the Seminole County Medical Examiner. So has the State actually even proven that Trayvon is indeed, deceased? Without the M.E. the ballistics are essentially moot – where did the aforementioned bullet come from? They have not established it came from Trayvon’s body. Think about it.
Because of pre-trial ‘motions in limine’ to exclude the defense bringing it up, O’Mara cannot mention it. Would/Will the jurors notice a missing M.E. = Trayvon blood tox. etc?
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
"The answer is this. No, he did not have to prove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. He did not have to prove even that his additional facts were more likely true than not. The real nature of his burden concerning his defense of justification is that his evidence of additional facts need merely leave the jury with a reasonable doubt about whether he was justified in using deadly force. Hence, if he wanted his self-defense to be considered, it was necessary to present evidence that his justification might be true. It would then be up to the jury to decide whether his evidence produced a reasonable doubt about his claim of self-defense."
Case: MICHAEL V. MONTIJO, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee
OMG. One is dead, another is a liar.
Need picture of Judge Nelson with Pam Bondi sitting on her shoulder whispering in her ear.
Is the jury there?
>>what for?<<
ssssshhhhhhhhh! those pictures, remember?
PLACEMARK
I MUST GET UP TO WALK AROUND.
I live in a community of nearly a 1,000 homes, was president of the HOA for several years, and have traveled every street in the community. If I were out on certain streets in this community at night as to where I could not see certain street signs, there would be streets I could not specify the name of those streets off the top of my head, even while there. I would have to see the street sign to name the street.
PROSECUTOR: “We have circumstantial evidence. We have meaningless minor inconsistencies.”
-Basically, this sounds like the death knell of the losing team.
He just laughed at himself. Probably for getting away with the LIAR comment.
LOL!!!
Right back atcha’...up high. ;)
No
judge is letting prosecutor run away as a mini closing. She should just issue her PREDETERMINED RULING and move on.
They can't get jobs in the private sector so they become judges and prosecutors
.
Jury is still out.
I wonder if she has pre-prepared “notes” to make her ruling. I know, it’s a rhetorical question.
Welcome to the thread.
Flashed through my mind for a brief moment as well, but then I talked myself out of it.
She wants to show disdain for the Defense so she can go to parties if he gets off.
“Oh Zimmerman was guilty. The jury were just idiots. It wasn’t my fault. Please like me”
“Prosecution just said Zimmerman bears burden of proof in showing self defense.”
Huh? Did this trial get moved to Italy where it is “guilty until proven innocent”?!
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.