Skip to comments.Prosecutors in Zimmerman Trial Ask Jury to Disregard Comments (Too favorable towards Zimmerman)
Posted on 07/02/2013 3:53:36 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
click here to read article
“She looks like Meatloaf wearing glasses!”
Ha!! I was actually referring to the judge! Corey looks, to quote Jim Bouton: “Like Joe Torre with t-ts!”
I hope that holds true. How in the world can the prosecution discount testimony merely because its favorable to Zimmerman, and came from an official?
Because the fix is in.
Pretty convincing disguise, isn’t it?
Yeah, but I get the sickening feeling that whats going to happen here is the prosecution is going to put the Mother on the stand to cry, and the Jury is going to get soft, especially since the Judge has pretty much ruled that no negative info about “baby Trayvon” can come in.
I don’t think they will get GZ on murder 2, but I think they are going to introduce manslaughter and get him on the absurd idea that he “shouldn’t have gotten out of his car”.
Oh, and there will still be riots as the “Celebrations” will turn into riots.
The charge of 2nd degree murder was intended to inflame blacks and then to insure Zimmerman’s acquittal—so that we could have a summer of ‘unrest.’ This has become obvious to me.
That was lurking in the back of my mind. These endless examples of incompetence do seem to be intentional.
Why the objection to the obviously biased judge in an obvious political show trial?
Common practice in any totalitarian nation....Communist China, the old Soviet Union, Communist Vietnam, etc etc.
A corrupt and politically controlled judicial system is s.o.p. in any tin pot dictatorship where rule of law has been overthrown....USA for instance. Where Obama enforces only laws he likes and subverts the Constitution regularly.
Happily, the idiot RINO Repubs and the Dems will pass amnesty for about 30 million undocumented low income Democrat voters, so the Constitution can be safely buried under the yoke of Police State tyranny for maybe 100 years.
“... but drew no immediate objection from the state.”
Were they asleep? They let their own witness testify as to the credibility of the defendant? Then waited to move to strike, so the jury could hear it all again from the judge when he told them to disregard it? Apart from the obviously weak merits of the case, that’s just really awful lawyering. Meanwhile, it worked out well for the defense, but I wonder how they got down that road. I assume it had something to do with why there was no immediate arrest. If so, how in the world did the prosecution not see that coming? That’s worth a look.
I think the prosecution might loose this case, which would be hugh. Do you think so to? If so, your right. But whose really to say?
O’Mara asked that question rather quickly following another question. And the cop answered it immediately.
And the way the press reporting it is wrong. He didn’t say Zimmerman “seemed” to be telling the truth. He said he “believed” Zimmerman was telling the truth.
No WONDER I flunked Math!
Martin was a black teenager. Zimmerman is a “white” Hispanic adult. According to these liberals cowards, Zimmerman would have had to be dead before he thought his life was in danger.
The defense would always make the motion, though they may not believe they are going to get it, they would make the motion.
On appeal, one issue may then be that the motion was improperly denied.
There is no way this judge will take the responsibility for dismissing these charges.
I’m assuming she is an elected judge, but even if not, she will not assume a duty that she can avoid.
“Wanna kiss me, ducky?”
My heart sank when I heard it was an all women jury.
Some of these chicks might not be able to get over the fact that a 17 yr old "child" was killed, no matter the circumstances. Everything that might point at this kid being a punk looking for trouble will fall on deaf ears. Their decision could be based on emotion and sympathy only.
Is the necessary inclusion of manslaughter embedded in Florida law? I was under the impression that there was a specific agreement between prosecution and defense that murder 2 was it in this case - no manslaughter inclusion.
I am nowhere near a lawyer, just trying to understand.
A judge should only instruct on manslaughter if the evidence would be consistent with such a verdict. I really really dislike the notion that a judge should interpret the evidence, but in the case at hand both the defense and prosecutor have effectively stipulated that TM's death was not accidental. If both prosecutor and defendant agree that the evidence is inconsistent with a manslaughter, I can't see any basis whatsoever for the judge to disagree.
Oh - and I covet your tagline! ;-P
I sadly agree with you. If found not guilty, there will be riots, and who knows where they won’t be. I bet even if found guilty, there will still be riots, but the “hunting” they do will explode all over the country. There will be a lot more incidents of whites and Asians being violently assaulted and sometimes killed.
See this June 29, 2013 post which refers and links to State v. Wimberly, 498 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 1986); and this post from earlier the same day, referring to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure RULE 3.510. Finally, see this post from the same day which enumerates the necessarily included offense (manslaughter) and the permissive included offenses (also referred to as "Category Two" offenses), and a cite to Jamerson v. State that describes the conditions for giving a category two, permissive lesser included charge, to the jury.
-- I was under the impression that there was a specific agreement between prosecution and defense that murder 2 was it in this case - no manslaughter inclusion. --
If the jury gets the case, they must be given the manslaughter instruction. Nobody has discretion on that, not even the judge.
I don't know if, when the judge gets the case on a motion for judgment of acquittal, she must also consider manslaughter. The statute and conforming rule refer to "the jury." I haven't looked for case law on what happens if the judge takes the decision out of the hands of the jury because the state has failed to meet its burden. I don't think knowing that law matters in the Zimmerman case because even if the law says Zimmerman is entitled to a motion for judgment of acquittal, this judge won't follow the law in that regard.
For some reason, Corey reminds me of the "Wise Latina" lesbian sitting on the SC.
I think liberalism is always ugly because it is the face of wickedness. Even if you don't have natural beauty, the beauty of God will shine through that person if they love Him. If they don't, that shows.
Reminds me of the old Fram oil filter commercial: Pay me now or pay ME later.
When the whole Ponzi scheme of our 'economy' collapses; there'll be riots in the streets anyway.
It was the prosecutor who made Rachel Jeantel repeat “creepy ass cracka” over and over, for example, making sure the jury got it.
There have been more than a few times I suspected that the prosecution is deliberately throwing the case.
It’s defense attorneys who are typically the slimeballs who do everything they can to bring about injustice, so they can line their pockets. Not the prosecution.
These guys were given marching orders from above, and they have to know the defendant is not guilty.
Thanks, Cboldt. I hope I am this clear and concise when I write about my own specialized fields of endeavor!
I have plenty of room for improvement, but I think anybody can "get there." It just takes practice. Work on it.
Thank you for your kind compliment . . . sir.
Interesting because all the pundits keep talking that the jury could find him guilty on Manslaughter. But as I search the internet I can not find any charges on Manslaughter. I read articles and forums from 2012 and even supporters of 2nd degrees argued against Manslaughter. I think the line between certain types of Manslaughter and self defense is so thin that no prosecutor would have brought it to a jury.
After the prosecution rests, the judge should acquit. Zimmerman doesn't need to take the stand because the prosecution played interviews of Zimmerman that were not self incriminating. Why be cross-examined now?
None of this matters.
The media is reporting negatively for Zimmerman.
The jury might just acquit him.
The media will act astonished.
The race-baiters will inflame the hoods and campuses.
There will be rioting.
The media will love it and bait it.
It’s what the liberals and race-baiters and media have wanted all along.
Disagree with the ruling. The detective was testifying about his interrogation of Zimmerman and the reasons he conducted it in the way he did. Therefore his assessment of Zimmerman’s truth fullness as he went along and what that assessment meant to the investigation, were all relevant.
He also said he believed Zimmerman and that he found zero evidence Zimmerman racially profiled TM.
Keep in mind this “mistake” may be by the judge and could result in the successful appeal of a Z conviction.
Ha, I remember her and that case. She was under the protection of so many FreeRepublic women here when they decided to unleash the chicken coop at me for saying Yates should be given the death penalty. I was told at the time that I didnt understand the stress a woman canbe under sometimes.
This gets me as well - racially profiling TM wouldn't mean that GZ is guilty.
According to most "Racial profiling" in this case basically means that based on his previous experiences Mr. Zimmerman reasonably suspected that TM was engaging in suspicious behavior. Does that suspicion mean that GZ wasn't allowed to defend himself?
This trial is an attempt by the establishment to placate a certain segment of the population who are predisposed towards committing acts of violence and thievery against other people and businesses.
This segment of the population has been egged on by an irresponsible press, irresponsible politicians, and irresponsible public officials up to and including our irresponsible president. These people were manipulated for the purpose of advancing a specific agenda.
Once the wrecking ball started rolling... the damage was inevitable. No matter what the outcome we are all going to pay a price. The damage has already been done... we just don't know yet whether in the end what proportion it will be in the form of murdered and injured innocent people and stolen goods or the wreckage of the reputation of what is left of our legal system.
I have no idea what you said.
I've heard a prosecutor use the phrase "throw a skunk in the jury box and ask them not to smell it". Both phrases drive home the point that the knowledge can't be undone.
I think the outrage is based in the idea that a black thug was killed while imposing a beatdown/murder on a non-black.
I think this is the basis for their rage - the sense of entitlement to initiate “payback” beatdowns with impunity.
Along this same line of questioning, I was really unnerved by the "medical examiner" making definitive conclusions based solely on reviewing pictures of Zimmerman that she called "distorted". She admitted that she doesn't understand physics, which means she doesn't understand how the physical world works (including gravity). She kept proclaiming that the injuries to each part of Mr. Z's head was from a single contact. How can her "expert" opinion be any more valid than the 2 detectives who believed, based on their training and experience, that Mr. Z was telling the truth?
MOM did a pretty good job at cross examining her, but I think he'd have made a better defense if he brought in a skull and made her demonstrate how a single contact to a hard, oval object can cause multiple specific contusions, bruises, and swelling on other parts of the scalp.
They’re trying hard to railroad Zimmerman. But unfortunately for the prosecutor, what has been heard, cannot be unheard.
Ain’t it a shame....
Here's a good example of what can happen:
Forrest Griffin is the former UFC Light Heavyweight Champion and is well known for being able to take massive punishment. In the following video at 6:28, Griffin is fighting Anderson Silva, who is probably the most accurate striker in MMA history. It looks like Griffin is merely tapped by Silva and he collapses like a rag doll...
Many times, a fighter is caught with a good strike to the head and they are declared technically knocked out. The fighter almost always is still active, grabbing the opponents leg or the ref and they refuse to believe they were TKO'ed until they see the replay on the big screen. Zimmerman would not even know he was briefly unconscious.
Also, other commentators have said that blocking someone's airway is not part of MMA. Such ignorance - it's a BIG part of Brazilian Jujutsu (BJJ) and "ground and pound".
So, combine an initial strike to the head that breaks Zimmerman's nose, with his head hitting the concrete, then having his breathing disrupted - I would be surprised if he wasn't at least briefly unconscious and highly incapacitated from lack of O2 without even knowing it. I've seen it many, many times during MMA fights (one of my favorite sports).
All this, plus Martin having Zimmerman under "full mount" which is almost impossible for experienced fighters to escape under the best of conditions, then Martin goes for Zimmerman's gun... no one could deny that Zimmerman was in serious trouble!
And that's before the state of Florida decided to ruin his life.
I haven’t seen the ruling. I’m not sure what he was thinking. Perhaps he believes the Detective is providing an opinion prevented according to law. That seems a strange concept, but there are times when the law does come down on things a little different than what we would expect.
I’m not sure you are off base here. It may be a good point to use during an appeal.
One of many. The other day the judge told defense counsel they had five minutes to finish their re-cross examination of a witness.
When Zimmerman is acquitted, all the TrayBama sympathizers are going to hit the streets and riot like there’s no tomorrow.
The ugly side of the race baiters will backfire on them.
Bring it on!