Skip to comments.Pal testifies that Zimmerman said Martin grabbed his gun
Posted on 07/02/2013 10:04:19 AM PDT by Red Steel
George Zimmerman's best friend and the author of a book defending him said the neighborhood watch volunteer told him Trayvon Martin went for his gun as the two grappled in a gated community in Florida last year.
Mark Osterman took the stand in Zimmerman's second degree murder trial and told jurors what Zimmerman recounted to him when he picked him up from the Sanford Police station after the Feb. 26, 2012 incident.
"Somehow I broke his grip on the gun when the guy grabbed between the grip and hammer," Osterman, author of "Defending our Friend: The Most Hated Man in America," said, quoting a Zimmerman he described as "stunned" and "detached. ...
Earlier Tuesday, the lead police detective who investigated the shooting, took the stand for a second day and said the defendant's story remained consistent throughout the investigation. Sanford Police Det. Christopher Serino, who initially wanted to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter but was overruled,
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Cementing the not guilty verdict in the jury’s minds, which is coming....
How is this not hearsay?
If the jury is honest, it will have no choice to to acquit Zimmerman.
Admission against interest is an exception to the hearsay rule.
How is that against his interest? It fits his story.
Although any reasonable person with an IQ greater than 80 would vote "not guilty" I'll bet ya 10 bucks that none of the six jurors meets those standards and will,as a result,convict him.
Whaddya say...are we on?
Is there a recording?? If not...I’d call it literary license...despite the quotes.
And Fox News is STILL using the 12-year-old innocent little Trayvon photos, when we all know he was a 17 year old grown thug.
its against the interests of the prosecutor (who called the witness) ?
I am guessing... I am not a lawyer and don’t even play one on TV (and I didnt even sleep at a holiday inn express last night)
All it takes is one to hang the jury.
The Defense has that.
“There also was conflicting testimony from neighbors that witnessed parts of the struggle between Martin and Zimmerman. Some said it appeared the larger Zimmerman was straddling Martin, but neighbor Jonathan Good said it appeared Martin was on top.”
“SOME SAID,” Zimmerman was on top. They have more than one witness who says this? I haven’t heard of even one, let alone two. Have I missed something or is this made up, wishful thinking?
It is hearsay. However, used to show consistency in that Zimmerman - according to the witness - told him how the shooting went down in the immediate aftermath and can be compared to his recounting of the same story to others.
It isn’t being admitted as evidence. It’s this guy’s story, but can be compared to actual evidence such as Z’s interview statements.
Rachel Jenteal was also a “hearsay” type of witness. She had no way to independently verify that what Trayvon was saying on the phone was true, she wasn’t there, she was Trayvon’s friend and therefore biased etc.
Look at the last line people. The detective who wanted to initially charge him and let the DA sort it out admitted to the court that Zimmerman’s testimony was consistent throughout.
Zimmerman’s story is AFTER the shot he rolled out from underneath Martin and got on top of him to hold his arms away from his body..
The Defense has that.
Care to back that up with ten bucks? (not *real* bucks,or course)
If I recall correctly - and can stand corrected if wrong - the same witness also said that she heard THREE gunshots, a “pop pop pop”.
Totally discredited testimony as the gun was proven to have only fired once.
He is testifying to what George Zimmerman said to him.
He is not testifying to events at which he was not present.
The testimony establishes that Zimmerman has not given different people different stories.
Statements of party/opponent are not hearsay.
That's a mighty big if...
Every significant state witness for the prosecution gets effectively crossed and impeached on the stand. It is about over.
The news hear is that Sanford Police Det. Christopher Serino who wanted to charge Zim with Manslaughter, was not overruled because of the facts, but on interpretation of the law. Also, he in no way thought second degree murder.
See post #24
Think: Casey Anthony.
Nothing will give me complete confidence that Zimmerman will be found not guilty. No matter how many witnesses or how much evidence back up his story. My heart sank when I heard that it is an all women jury.
< Although any reasonable person with an IQ greater than 80 would vote “not guilty” I’ll bet ya 10 bucks that none of the six jurors meets those standards and will,as a result,convict him. >
Every time i think about high-profile juries nowadays, i start wondering what their NSA files have in them. Sad.
IIRC, after Martin was shot, Zimmerman testified (in the recording) that he did get on top briefly and hold him down. I think Martin was face down at the time which would mean that GZ slipped out from under him.
Oops...didn’t see your comment before making mine.
There also was conflicting testimony from neighbors that witnessed parts of the struggle between Martin and Zimmerman. Some said it appeared the LARGER Zimmerman was straddling Martin, but neighbor Jonathan Good said it appeared Martin was on top.
I wonder about Zimmerman being larger than Martin. Sure he is bigger now that he gained some weight but all the pictures I’ve seen of him after this happened showed him being much smaller. And Martin was 6 ft+ wasn’t he?
“George Zimmerman’s best friend and the author of a book defending him said the neighborhood watch volunteer told him Trayvon Martin went for his gun...”
I find the gun grab to be the shakiest part of this story. Seems way too convenient to justify the shooting. Martin grabs the gun, Zim notices it while being beaten senseless, gets Martin’s hand off it, draws and shoots? Seems unlikely unless Martin saw the gun being drawn tried to grab it and failed. Its easy to have your perception of events be wrong during stress.
True, but they are human and will fear for their safety and being hated by blacks and ridiculed and harassed constantly by the media by if they acquit. Honesty may have to take a back seat. We will see.
I don’t find it shaky at all. Zimmerman’s jacket slides back, exposing the gun, they both reach for it, a tussle ensues and Zimmerman wins. Not hard to imagine at all.
If the jury are fair enough, they will have no choice to to acquit Zimmerman.
If the jury have conscience, they will have no choice to to acquit Zimmerman.
Hope so. but given what I know about juries. we won’t know for sure until the verdict is read.
The best reporting on the trial that I’ve found is here:
(no, it’s not my blog.)
The prosecution basically has no case, their own witnesses back up the defendant’s story, let alone never coming close to overcoming the “reasonable doubt” standard.
Those low-information voters who are getting their take on this trial from the MSM and lefty websites are getting a different story than what is being presented to the jury.
And the defense hasn’t even started their case yet.
After seeing the Prosecution playing the Hannity interview, I think I have this figured out.
The prosecution has known all along that the original inditement was bogus and they would never convict.
So the goal is to appease the blacks with a trial and at the same time publicize and show how very clearly innocent Zimmerman is, all to avoid an excuse for riots and looting.
It is, but it's the best testimony available indicating Zimmerman's credibility.
Guess what? Even if the prosecution said, “Your honor, nobody in this courtroom think Zimmerman murdered Trayvon. I spoke with the parents and, after hearing all this, THEY now believe Zimmerman acted in self defense....”
THERE WILL STILL BE RIOTS.
There is no stopping the riots. Hell, they may riot if he’s found guilty. I can’t even be sure they won’t in THAT case.
You have a lot of faith in low info women voters of Florida.
One out of six will do.
"What will the state do to protect us after we have reached a verdict?"
“I dont find it shaky at all. Zimmermans jacket slides back, exposing the gun, they both reach for it, a tussle ensues and Zimmerman wins. Not hard to imagine at all.”
The more I think about this the more questions I have. I assume the gun was in a waistband holster at or behind the hip. There is a guy mounted MMA style across his chest, stomach or waist. In any case Martin’s knees or legs would be covering Zim’s waist/gun. How would Marthin see the gun? How could Zim draw? Especially when someone is punching his face.
If the jury is honest, it will have no choice to to acquit Zimmerman.
If I'd proofread my statement more carefully, I'd have added:
If the jury is honest, it will have no choice but to to acquit Zimmerman.
That's all the difference in the world! Sorry for the confusion, everyone!
“I said ‘Help me. Help me. He's killing me,’” Zimmerman said. He then told the police investigator that Martin replied: You're going to die tonight.
Zimmerman said he struggled with Martin. As they fought, Zimmerman said his clothes were pushed up enough to show his gun. Zimmerman said he thought Martin was reaching for the weapon so the neighborhood watch volunteer said he shot Martin.
You got me, the teenager said, Zimmerman told the officer.”
Whether or not Martin actually reached or the gun, or lunged but didn't touch it, or whatever, is immaterial. Zimmerman was threatened with death, thought Martin was going for the gun, and defended himself. I'm not going to lose sleep over the mechanics of the scuffle.
fox has been sliding bit by bit over to the dark side.