Posted on 07/09/2013 4:51:37 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Today, July 9th, is DAY #21 (of 5th week) State of Florida V. George Zimmerman case.
Yesterday was the first full day of defense witnesses. Perhaps the most significant of the first set were the two police officers who stated Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father, said on 2/28/12 the cries for help on the 911 calls were NOT Trayvon. Later in the day Tracy Martin took the stand and essentially said the two detectives were lying. A great analysis of the events from yesterday is available HERE.
What additionally strikes as important to us is the first signs of desperation from the original nucleus of the Scheme Team construct, Benjamin Crump and Daryl Parks – attorneys for the Martin family. Parks appeared on Piers Morgan show last night and the video should be watched by anyone who knows how the scheme was constructed.
We accept that Mark O’Mara is conflicted in this case, and he is trying to walk a fine line between presenting a defense to a case built on political pressure and outright fraud; Yet simultaneously avoiding exposition of both the politics and the fraud itself.
The intentionally avoided open doors exposing the fraud creates anxiety for those of us who know what is inside the room he is avoiding. Our prayers are that his passing those wide open doors is based on prudence [within an unknown strategy]. However, our fear is the hasty and politically correct avoidance might cause him to pass by the room holding the key to George Zimmerman’s ultimate ‘long-term’ freedom.
It should be noted the NAACP Annual National Convention starts in Orlando on Friday; Additionally, preparations are being made in/around Miami-Dade for a Wednesday defense wrap up with a community/LEO preparation meeting today.
(Excerpt) Read more at wftv.com ...
Is it just me, or have any of you trial junkies noticed yourselves using more legalese in your ordinary conversations with your spouse, friends, co-workers...
“I’d like to agree with you but those facts are not in evidence”
“The jury’s still out on that one”
“Objection!”
“Sidebar”
“Cross-examine”
“Find” (as a verb), “finding” (as a noun)
etc
I don’t know if released or not — but O’Mara told the judge after he stepped down that he wanted to talk to him later in that day.
He had the personal gravity of Rod Steiger and the medical presence of Dr Gillespie (Lionel Barrymore was best).
>> My sweet daddy practiced law for over fifty years. I wouldn’t want to interfere with his following the case.
Heh... I withdraw my objection. Tell your sweet daddy he has a sweet daughter.
Now recross and then argument?
>> O’Mara told the judge after he stepped down that he wanted to talk to him later in that day.
Yes, I remember that part. As I recall, we were a bit puzzled...
Yes, I guess that is what happened there. They couldn’t reduce the charges, so without being able to prove a conscious crime, they let her go. I didn’t understand that all, but that sort of makes sense of it.
I’ve watched some but not all of the trial. It seemed that every witness I saw was released subject to recall.
They say that Florida law does not allow for a sliding scale, the jury cannot reduce the verdict. It is the same in NY, where the jury let some guy go who shot 4 black men in the subway and then shot one of them again in the head. They couldn’t reduce the charges, so the declared him not guilty.
Isn’t that what happened in Rodney King? The cops were overcharged, with attempted murder, and couldn’t be found guilty of some sort of assault/battery/brutality charge?
He knows that. Spent more time in jails and courthouses before that she of seven then hardened criminals ever see today. We still end the day with those celebratory ice cream. Could I ever relate to that picture
“That’s a long beatdown.”
Weren’t there something like 14 screams for help? I can’t remember. Info overload!
Testimony complete. MOM making argument.
Mantei’s dancing explanation of whether it was a Daubert argument or the other one was bizarre. Mannerisms I mean. He’s half a world away from O’Mara’s calm, smooth reasoning.
I frankly do not remember the Rodney King verdict, but it would fit. The article didn’t mention CA as having the same law against reduced charges by juries.
My first reaction to law about juries reducing the charges was that it gives juries way too much authority, beyond their capabilities. Usually, they say that if you get into a case where you are wrongly accused of a crime that you should waive your right to a jury trial for this reason, but in this case, the judge is not impartial. It is not a good position to be in.
While grocery shopping, I bought a “Thinking of You” card for George. I will be happy to add any remarks along with mine you wish to send to George. Either private mail me or respond to this post and I will print and send with the card.
The card will go out tomorrow evening.
“in Rodney King? The cops were overcharged,”
Way over-charged! I saw the very first airing of the video. Never saw the whole thing again. King wouldn’t comply and get on the ground. He kept getting up and trying to go around the back of the car. I thought he was doped up on PCP.
Suggest you look into the concept of jury nullification. Juries have a lot of power.
Translates to the age of seven
Am on cell. Thumbs too big for little keyboard
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.