Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Defense rests; Zimmerman won't testify in murder trial
Fox News ^

Posted on 07/10/2013 12:46:07 PM PDT by Sopater

Edited on 07/10/2013 1:25:19 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-142 next last
To: Sopater

It was never on the books for Z to testify. It is a very unusual thing for a murder-case defendant to so, and there was no need for it in the Z case. The defense had already done more than enough to win.


51 posted on 07/10/2013 1:16:13 PM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Kinda looks like that fat John Goodman guy in a way.


52 posted on 07/10/2013 1:16:17 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Even if he’s convicted of anything, there are so many grounds for appeals.

The judge will probably be up for nomination to the supreme court next week.


53 posted on 07/10/2013 1:16:27 PM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Guilty! Oh, sorry, wrong thread.


54 posted on 07/10/2013 1:16:42 PM PDT by TheLawyerFormerlyKnownAsAl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: All
There is still the prosecutions rebuttal witnesess, defense sur-rebuttal, closing arguments and final instructions to go through before the Jury retires to deliberate.

Jury, you will be excused to deliberate until you come to a unanimous decision of guilty. Don't make me cut-off your food.

55 posted on 07/10/2013 1:18:18 PM PDT by mykroar (China and Russia are playing chess while Obamas's playing 52 card pick-up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

To be fair, she may just have been trying to figure out how much time the last part of the trial was going to take. OTOH, she has been biased (maybe taking instruction from the Dept of Injustice).


56 posted on 07/10/2013 1:18:38 PM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gettin Betta
If you had to draw a picture of an American liberal woman...That would be her

Fat and full of hate, sounds about right.........

57 posted on 07/10/2013 1:19:47 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Judge Nelson is "transgendered," right?

Looks like John Goodman in drag
58 posted on 07/10/2013 1:22:50 PM PDT by jrg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Absolutely correct. Some states it is mandatory. Judge must ask(without jury present) in either situation. If the Def. is going to testify the Judge must ask if they have made the decision without coercion.


59 posted on 07/10/2013 1:23:44 PM PDT by DrDude (Governor of the 57th State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: spel_grammer_an_punct_polise

Huh? Duh. Once the defense rests, it then clear that Z (or anybody else) is not going to testify.


60 posted on 07/10/2013 1:24:40 PM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

It will show who is who, fer sure


61 posted on 07/10/2013 1:25:13 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

If she asked that in front if the jury this case will get reversed if he gets convicted.
Just alluding to the defendant not testifying can get a case reversed.
Idiotic on her part.
If the state doesn’t prove it’s case then why should the defendant have to do anything? (Rhetorical question)
The fact is that the presumption of innocence alone is enough to acquit should the state not meet its burden of proof.
They clearly did not in this case.


62 posted on 07/10/2013 1:30:40 PM PDT by Clump ( the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ClaytonP

This one was rushed because the “judge” didn’t want Zimmerman to have time to prepare for a proper trial. It’s worked so far, as evidenced by the fact the Jury will never hear about St. Skittles’ proud reputation as a MMA-style street fighter. The Jury may surprise us all and acquit him.


63 posted on 07/10/2013 1:33:37 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

His defense lawyer was dead wrong in one of his statements.

GZ would be completely safe at my house if he needed to.


64 posted on 07/10/2013 1:33:44 PM PDT by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
When there's nothing more to say, you just go away

This "not guilty" verdict will cause more chaos than the original crime or even the Rodney King aftermath.

65 posted on 07/10/2013 1:34:40 PM PDT by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Is the jury sequestered?

I wish they were sequestered from that idiot judge.

66 posted on 07/10/2013 1:35:19 PM PDT by verga (A nation divided by Zero!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
If the jury was not present when she asked, she wasn't out of order.

I keep hearing that, and I saw when she asked him with the jury absent. I understand that's SOP. What I can't get an answer to from the armchair lawyers that could watch the stream (I couldn't) was, what about the first time she asked him? She asked Zimmerman twice, and the first time the Defense was furious. Since West was in the middle of questioning a witness, I think that was in front of the Jury and therefore improper.

But I don't know because the great minds are silent when I ask.

67 posted on 07/10/2013 1:38:11 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
If she asked that with the jury present, she was WAY out of line, and probably committed yet another reversible error.

Fixed it for you.

68 posted on 07/10/2013 1:39:33 PM PDT by verga (A nation divided by Zero!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Innocent.

Guilty. Damn. In more ways than one.

69 posted on 07/10/2013 1:42:28 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby
Looks like John Gooodman

I beg to differ. John Goodman looks much more feminine than this judge....lol

70 posted on 07/10/2013 1:45:19 PM PDT by Bobalu (It is not obama we are fighting, it is the media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Something in my gut feeling tells me the outcome wont have as much impact on the streets as in the left schemed media madness. But we shall see what we shall see.


71 posted on 07/10/2013 1:45:39 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or Tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda
"This case is so open and shut if this jury has an IQ above 10 they should be back with a Not Guilty verdict in 5 minutes..if they are borderline stupid it will take them longer but this should have never been brought to trial..race baiters like the DOJ and Jackson and Sharpton wanted it"

In an honest world, you are right, but in this one I wouldn't be surprised with either a hung jury or a guilty verdict, perhaps on a lesser charge. The jurors know what will happen if they acquit, including to them and their families and that may effect their thinking.

72 posted on 07/10/2013 1:46:33 PM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Put a necklace on that guy!

It's the 'Invasion of the LGBT's!!!', ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!

73 posted on 07/10/2013 1:50:21 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Judge Nelson is "transgendered," right?


74 posted on 07/10/2013 1:50:52 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or Tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Father & Son?

75 posted on 07/10/2013 1:51:00 PM PDT by Average Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Average Al
Who is that masked man?
76 posted on 07/10/2013 1:51:34 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Who could have guessed that one day pro wrestling would be less fake than mainstream journalism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: expat2

Why does everyone seem to think this is slam-dunk?

We thought that with CommieCare in the Supreme Court. So much for that.


77 posted on 07/10/2013 1:52:47 PM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Winston

Looks like Bammy found Ruth Buzzy Ginsburgs eventual SCOTUS replacement. All leftist black-robed drecks float to the top of the pond in BarryWorld.


78 posted on 07/10/2013 1:53:21 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or Tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

Zimmerman taking the stand was the last ditch hope of the prosecution as they still have no case at this point. They would have worked him over mercilessly hoping for the slightest slip up to pounce on. The judge knew it as well which is why she tried to goad him onto the stand, or at least help to make him look guilty in the jurors eyes by constantly reminding them that he won’t take the stand.


79 posted on 07/10/2013 1:53:41 PM PDT by Teflonic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
"Who is that masked man?"

Picked it off a UK site a couple years ago...Not sure anymore. Might be a UK Hells Angel...

80 posted on 07/10/2013 1:55:41 PM PDT by Average Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
The prosecution is going to bring in witnesses to rebutt some of the defense’s witnesses.

In slightly different words, the prosecution wants to show reasonable doubt as to GZ's innocence, to convict.

81 posted on 07/10/2013 1:55:43 PM PDT by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Bobalu
Speaking of John Goodman in drag...


82 posted on 07/10/2013 1:57:04 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Bobalu

She looks like she might have enough built up gas to blow her right out of that chair?

83 posted on 07/10/2013 1:59:46 PM PDT by Average Al
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Average Al

Dead ringer...

84 posted on 07/10/2013 2:01:38 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM

Someone should photoshop Goodman’s head from that drag photo onto the judge’s body...lol


85 posted on 07/10/2013 2:02:00 PM PDT by Bobalu (It is not obama we are fighting, it is the media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Average Al
ROFLOL....what's with the costume jewelery outside the robe? and she needs a hair cut for those split ends.............or........


86 posted on 07/10/2013 2:05:34 PM PDT by Daffynition (Stand Your Ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion
The judge got in one last lick asking if George Z was going to testify. The judge is out of order on this item and this shows the prejudice of the judge.

That depends upon whether the judge made the statement in the prsence of the jury. If the jury was out or if the comment was made during a sidebar, then the question is perfectly proper and appropriate. If the jury was present, then the proper way for the judge to ask the question is "does the defense intend to call any more witnesses" or "does the defense rest?"

87 posted on 07/10/2013 2:10:44 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

“This “not guilty” verdict will cause more chaos than the original crime or even the Rodney King aftermath. “

For that reason, I’m concerned the jury will find him guilty rather than be blamed for rioting and deaths that would result.


88 posted on 07/10/2013 2:11:21 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion
The judgE is out of order...

No, YOU'RE out of order!


89 posted on 07/10/2013 2:22:20 PM PDT by newfreep (Breitbart sent me...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Don’t you just love looking at a photo like that of the judge and knowing immediately that she’s a liberal. It’s automatic.


90 posted on 07/10/2013 2:22:52 PM PDT by cdga5for4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel

The defense eviscerated the prosecution so it should be a slam dunk. But you are right, this country has become so crazy and the governance so corrupt that anything is possible.


91 posted on 07/10/2013 2:26:14 PM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
He should have taken the stand, I think he made a big mistake in not doing so.

To give the prosecution their chance to shout random accusations and obscenties to him, interleaved with "did you not?" - while the judge sits back and allows all this?

GZ should not even come close to the witness stand. He has already delivered his side of the story in the video.

92 posted on 07/10/2013 2:28:27 PM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Who is that masked man?


Judge James Stewart QC

QC dress funny.

93 posted on 07/10/2013 2:32:13 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Jury may have been paid off by Holder’s people


94 posted on 07/10/2013 2:32:31 PM PDT by AdamBomb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Bet I know what the verdict will be.


95 posted on 07/10/2013 2:32:59 PM PDT by animal172 (My new hero....Trey Gowdy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet

ROTFLMAO !!


96 posted on 07/10/2013 2:35:04 PM PDT by Squantos ( Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Judge Nelson is "transgendered," right?

Nah....he's just "whacked"!

97 posted on 07/10/2013 2:37:22 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Rats vs. GOPe = Same train, different speed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ClaytonP

Perhaps this one had to be over before the NAACP Convention started. It’s July 13-17 in Orlando.


98 posted on 07/10/2013 2:38:13 PM PDT by caveat emptor (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

He may still yet testify on sur-rebuttal, after the state puts on their rebuttal (if the Judge and/or Florida law allows it)


99 posted on 07/10/2013 2:48:05 PM PDT by shalom aleichem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex
If that's so, how can he be on board with George Zimmerman being jailed?

Have you seen his approval ratings lately?

100 posted on 07/10/2013 2:52:04 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Army dad. And damned proud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson