Posted on 07/11/2013 4:59:59 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Today, July 11th, is DAY #23 (of 5th week) State of Florida V. George Zimmerman case.
Yesterday the defense rested its case. A legal analysis via Professor Jacobson HERE.
From my perspective the entire case ended, as expected, early in the day yesterday when Judge Nelson gave George Zimmerman his personal Platinum Express DCA Acquittal Card. The ruling, and more importantly the legal determination she used on the ruling, regarding the Trayvon Martin phone evidence was an immediate Nuclear DCA option. Nelson essentially ruled against admissibility based on ”authentication”. She could have kept it out under other legal reasoning, but no, she chose the one without the slightest chance of being upheld by a District Court of Appeals. IMHO this was intentional and aligns itself with the way she has ruled during the pre-trial discovery phase, and during the case itself. She’s a rigid ideologue, but she’s not stupid – this was intentional.
By ruling the phone records (texts and pics from Trayvon) cannot be “authenticated” to have originated by the specific personage of Trayvon Martin just gave the dismissal of the case to George Zimmerman with a bow on it.
As it was carefully explained to me, the phone is like a bucket. The data inside the phone is like marbles in a bucket. Some marbles from calls, others from pictures, others from texts, etc. The State brought the bucket into court – and validated the bucket contents with their own witness from the phone company – Both the State and the defense then began arguing their case around the phone call marbles in the bucket – Primarily with Rachel Jeantel. But no-one challenged the bucket itself. The State authenticated the bucket and the content of the bucket during the introduction.
The defense picks up the same bucket the state hands them, and now begins to use the contents – texts and pictures – and then Nelson rules the bucket itself cannot be authenticated. It doesn’t work that way.
If the state authenticates evidence, it cannot be divided and only authentic when the state holds it, but not the defense. Flawed logic – ABSOLUTELY positioned to give such a prejudicial outcome, the appeal would result in dismissal, not retrial. Nelson gave the case away to George Zimmerman.
She could have ruled on relevance, admissibility, or other factors – but she chose the one destined to fail, “authentication”. She gave it away.
In other news, people are catching on to the Eric Holder, Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Community Relations Service – being the actual puppeteers behind the entire construct of the false case. To them we say “welcome to the party pal“.
Andrew Branca, LOSD @LawSelfDefense
#zimmermantrial BDLR: “Being a police officer honorable profession.” But merely “wanting” to be one a sign of seething murderous rage.
Yesterday he said he would go about 3 hours.
Juror #5 reportedly smirked when he said Martin was unarmed unless you count his drink and skittles as being armed.
Is this a good or bad thing? A smirk? Like agreeing or disagreeing?
ooosh my nerves!!
3 Fs”? *nother drink*
lol
As of 1418 EST:
"A**Hole":5
"F***ing Punks":5
“I’d pay someone to run through the court showing the real pics of Martin playing gangster”
The ones with the gangsta gold fillings. Guy was a gangbanger.
Andrew Branca, LOSD @LawSelfDefense
#zimmermantrial BDLR: “We ask in this great country, where even a dummy like me can be a State prosecutor . . . “
Are people off by a few minutes??? no big deal
My husband has sold cars for thirty years.
Yes but that anti gun, be a passive person stuff is right up a female’s alley. It probably rings well with at least a couple of the jurors.
You are correct, he is trying to sound passionate but he sounds like a drunk in an argument. His subject manner is distasteful but the presentation is worse. I cant listen to him blabber anymore so I will read about it here. Who is doing the closing for the defense?
you make good points
that falsetto he is going into in almost ever sentence is driving me crazy
Comment From D Smith :
The State Attorney’s exaggerated voice is coming across as defensive. Doesn’t the state have to prove the guilt? He is poking holes in the defenses case.
No wonder I can’t follow. Shouldn’t have started that damn drinking game.
Gotcha! My husband has choice words for those guys too.
Whales are beaching themselves at this moment.
WE are the watercooler, heheh.
Leni
I have a live link open to hear and another open window for Free Republic. I am listening without viewing.
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.