Posted on 06/26/2013 5:34:24 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Today, June 26th, is DAY #13 (of 3rd week) State of Florida V. George Zimmerman case. An explosive second day of deconstructed witness testimony took place yesterday. Which leads to the “big question”:
Will witness #8, Rachel Jeantel, be called to the stand today?
[Yesterday could] … only be characterized as an utter debacle for the prosecution in Florida v. Zimmerman. Besides the testimony of a couple of highly professional law enforcement witnesses, the testimony of the the other State witnesses ranged from signing George Zimmerman’s praises, to acknowledging the utility of following a suspicious person from a distance, to being utterly discredited by razor sharp cross-examination of the defense.
Before we even get to the disaster that was the State’s witnesses, however, we first have to discuss this morning’s hearing and the extent to which it evanescent is the State’s case against George Zimmerman. State: Zimmerman Is So Good, He Must Be Bad ............
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
That is the point. Her testimony supports exactly what you said. And it is a major part of what the defense is saying.
Another prosecution witness tht seems more like a defense witness.
Are you kidding, I don’t think she has a clue where she is let alone what she has said. Actually, the real tragedy here is the prosecution, parents and people who have taken advantage if this half-witted person.
Impeaching a witness means you get evidence to discredit the witness and the testimony the witness made.
It means to use prior testimony to show that her current testimony is inconsistent. In other words, "you just testified that you heard T say ______X_______." But, in your prior deposition, you said _______Y________"
This website
has an analysis of each day’s testimony and videos of each witness testimony.
You would have to wait until tomorrow to get the stuff from today.
Here is the link to the analysis of YESTERDAY’s testimonies.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-trial-day-2-analysis-of-states-witnesses/
Recess over.
Reminds me of the day I beat a better racket ball player because I knew he was a fairly heavy smoker.
I just made him run around a lot to get points and then when he was red faced I took every consecutive point until the game was over and I won.
If she’s getting fidgity, she’ll be worse in ten minutes, etc.
He was so gentlemanly...he really wanted to say she's too DUMB for such a scenario, but he used the words "not sophisticated enough", "not worldy enough" and "naive".
what moment?
Mr. Hand looks like he’s ready to spring the trap.
what is the significance of R saying that the Crump interview meant “nothing to [her]”? TIA...
She said she didn’t take Crump’s interview seriously and just wanted to get it over with. That moment.
I think we are overloading their servers.
She is really struggling to read. Needs a TA !
Her “you can go” comments made TM’s father LAUGH!!!!
and then he pretended he was crying. I guarantee that’s what happened.
I wonder if the Crump PR machine can be held accountable for fraud in the suit vs. the home owners assn?
It means she lied under oath, didn’t take the interview seriously, that she has no respect for the law - which indicates that she can’t be believed now on the stand.
the attempt to impeach this witness
Ah okay, thanks. I’m not watching so I’m trying to decode the posts on here..lol.
Asking about March 13, 2013 deposition in Miami. West asking about what she said in Crump interview about Martin-Zimmerman confrontation. Jeantel getting obtuse.
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.