Skip to comments.Defense rests; Zimmerman won't testify in murder trial
Posted on 07/10/2013 12:46:07 PM PDT by SopaterEdited on 07/10/2013 1:25:19 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
click here to read article
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.
Kinda looks like that fat John Goodman guy in a way.
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.
Guilty! Oh, sorry, wrong thread.
Jury, you will be excused to deliberate until you come to a unanimous decision of guilty. Don't make me cut-off your food.
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).
Fat and full of hate, sounds about right.........
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.
Huh? Duh. Once the defense rests, it then clear that Z (or anybody else) is not going to testify.
It will show who is who, fer sure
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.
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.
His defense lawyer was dead wrong in one of his statements.
GZ would be completely safe at my house if he needed to.
This "not guilty" verdict will cause more chaos than the original crime or even the Rodney King aftermath.
I wish they were sequestered from that idiot judge.
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.
Fixed it for you.
Guilty. Damn. In more ways than one.
I beg to differ. John Goodman looks much more feminine than this judge....lol
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.
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.
It's the 'Invasion of the LGBT's!!!', ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!
Father & Son?
Why does everyone seem to think this is slam-dunk?
We thought that with CommieCare in the Supreme Court. So much for that.
Looks like Bammy found Ruth Buzzy Ginsburgs eventual SCOTUS replacement. All leftist black-robed drecks float to the top of the pond in BarryWorld.
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.
Picked it off a UK site a couple years ago...Not sure anymore. Might be a UK Hells Angel...
In slightly different words, the prosecution wants to show reasonable doubt as to GZ's innocence, to convict.
She looks like she might have enough built up gas to blow her right out of that chair?
Someone should photoshop Goodman’s head from that drag photo onto the judge’s body...lol
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?"
“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.
No, YOU'RE out of order!
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.
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.
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.
Jury may have been paid off by Holder’s people
Bet I know what the verdict will be.
Nah....he's just "whacked"!
Perhaps this one had to be over before the NAACP Convention started. It’s July 13-17 in Orlando.
He may still yet testify on sur-rebuttal, after the state puts on their rebuttal (if the Judge and/or Florida law allows it)
Have you seen his approval ratings lately?