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“.
Jeff Weiner @JeffWeinerOS
Nelson confirms 10-20-Life applies to 3rd-degree murder. West doesn’t seem to agree. #ZimmermanTrial #GeorgeZimmerman #TrayvonMartin
No chit! So we now must ask for ID before defending ourselves!
I’m confused on that. If I got this straight, she told West that “not guilty” wouldn’t be on the page with the charges, then she tells him all will be on one page. Then did I hear her say “I understand, but I’m not going to do that?” Wishing I had a replay of that.
I’m kidding here, but just barely.
.
DH usually means “dear husband”...or could be other adjectives depending on said husband.
He is not on parole. He is out on bond. Major difference in the 2.
You are married to a rarity. Civil defense attys are mostly normal people.
I don’t think it will be included because it’s possible that he was picked up and charged as an adult at some point in time. I think that was the point of saying that daddy called juvie first. Early reports didn’t mention juvie...
POST 708 IS THE BISCUIT IMHO
YOUR COMMENTS PLEASE AS YOU CAN
Do what you got to do. I will.
There are people that have this already. Her rulings match what she had before she walked into court this am.
“West (essentially): “I’ll try to be ready, but I’ll repeat, “This was all put on us just this morning.””
To which she replied, “I understand” Then she left, “but don’t really give a good ****!”
Florida appeals court case from 2008, MORTON v. STATE gives definition:
(1) Serious bodily injury defines itself and is understood by its everyday common usage.A beating which could produce disfigurement or brain damage has the potential of "great bodily injury"(2) The word “serious,” when used to define the degree of bodily injury, means dangerous, grave, grievous, or great, as distinguished from slight. It is a bodily injury which has important or dangerous possible consequences.
(3) Serious bodily injury may include, but does not require, serious permanent disfigurement or a protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member or organ.
(4) The determination of whether a bodily injury constitutes serious bodily injury is solely a question of fact for the jury.
Good for you! Impressive.
I only learned this first hand last year. The lawyer I was involved with had himself fallen with troubles of alcohol, he has since moved on to being the go-to guy in helping other attorneys get the help they need. It’s been shown that they are most resistant due to the stigma they believe it holds.
Seekingtruth; the defense won that the state can’t argue GZ was the agressor
Per Bill Schaeffer WFTV, the judge told the prosecution there has to be intent in the child abuse charge and this telegraphed to the defense that if they wish to argue against that charge, that is the basis they should use.
I can’t think of any good reason for MoM to not be there right now.
Heh. Yeah, I caught that, too.
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.