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“.
Prosecution seems to have no problem throwing Jantel personally under the bus, but DOES want jury to consider her testimony that favors them.
“little trayvon.”
Old enough to enlist in the Marines. Just would need sperm donor’s permission. No little kid!
PUNK..not PUNKS
Z was showing frustrations with recent crimes in the neighborhood “...they always get away”
// I loved this, Bernie says foul language does not make someone unreliable........oh, yeah? He applies this ONLY to Dee Dee, aka Rachel Jeantel. After fighting to keep the text messages out that would have impeached her yet again, that takes nerve. LMAO If foul language does not stop us from judging Rachel, what about applying it to George. //
Exactly; he’s using Z’s colorful language (as he called it when discussing Jeantel) totally against him, going to Z’s frame of mind/profiling.
One juror “smirked” at a pros. line and that’s “bad for the defense”??
Define “smirked”.
Do you read minds also?
Just wondering...
And I’m thinking, there SHOULD be an aquittal but if the jury is hung, instead of convicting, that’s better than nothing.
Therefore a single juror smirk - and even “mind reading” them as possibly for conviction - does not a conviction make.
Sorry, I’m just not getting your thought processess...
Thankz fur kepping sch gud skore. I’m drunk as hell.
*nother drink* (Only tossing them back for verbal Eff Bombs)
Jar Jar is the one that doesn’t sound like Kevin Costner.
Mantei
I was thinking I’m watching a closing argument, but it seems this is a SNL skit.
She lied about her age because she was afraid she might explain why she can’t write in cursive.
BDLR says he had a dream this morning that Rachel would not be judged by the color of her language but on the content of her testimony. Then he goes on to explain why Rachel lied.
Or, poor kid only had a can of tea and skittles and was murdered.
All that Martin had to do was stay put in Miami.
Bigger man on top -— uhhh — Martin was the bigger man.
Minding his own business by looking into peoples’ windows.
Kathi Belich, WFTV@KBelichWFTV
Juror B 29 is avoiding eye contact with the prosecutor. She’s in the front row. #Zimmermanon9
Yeah, Mantei is the one over whose head I keep mentally projecting the word “DWEEB” in big neon letters.
I’m 57 and save any Obama speech, I have never heard lies and rambling like this in my life
The more this lunatic rambles the more I wish I was on the jury. Man do I want to slap little Bernie down.
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.