Zimmerman, by his own actions - demonstrated that his sworn testamony is worthless. The jury now knows that anything he says “under oath” is not to be trusted.
The only thing they have to work with now, is the evidence (which supports Zimmerman’s story), the police report (which supports Zimmeman’s story) and the evidence collected at the crime scene (which supports his story).
Instead of having 100% of the trust - he has sacrificed a huge amount of that trust. This was stupid of him. Perhaps you would do something like this; but I can assure you that if this was MY life on the line - I would have been 100% truthful. I fail to understand what possible motive he could have had to pull this stunt.
If the bail was set higher, I’d contest it on my first offense, my standing in the neighborhood and charge “Unreasonable Bail”.
As is, he gave the Prosecution ammunition it didn’t have before. In fact, prior to this stunt; the Prosecution had no ammo whatsoever.
This is Scooter Libby all over again.
“Zimmerman, by his own actions - demonstrated that his sworn testamony is worthless. The jury now knows that anything he says ‘under oath’ is not to be trusted.”
I don’t know if any of this is admissable at trial, but even if it is he could plausibly argue that instead of lying he was merely confused. Even if the jury doesn’t believe him it wouldn’t mean they can’t trust anything he says under oath, for he has hard evidence to back up an assertion of self-defense in the form of eye witness testimony and medical reports.
“he has sacrificed a huge amount of that trust. This was stupid of him”
Yes, it was, in a PR sense. Or if not stupid—since it’s not as clear to as it is to you that he’s a liar instead of naive—at least unfortunate. But he was already losing the PR battle BIG TIME, so it’s no huge loss. As far as the actual trial goes I don’t think it’ll amount to much.
“As is, he gave the Prosecution ammunition it didn’t have before. In fact, prior to this stunt; the Prosecution had no ammo whatsoever.”
Again, I don’t know if him possibly lying at a bail hearing is admissable in a murder 2 trial. Maybe if they added perjury onto the charge. Anyway, I can’t possibly imagine the state getting a murder 2 conviction off of lying in the bail hearing. That’s ridiculous. It’s neither here nor there, really, as regards the larger charge. They will have to convict on the actual evidence, and as you say they have none of that.
Do you post in a clown suit? Or do you just play a clown on Free Republic?