Zimmerman Trial: 'The Sound of Silence'

Breitbart.com ^ | 12 Jul 2013 | Joel B. Pollak

[Hotlanta Mike]

The most dramatic moment yet of the George Zimmerman trial yet occurred during the defense's closing argument Friday morning, when attorney Mark O'Mara paused for four minutes to illustrate a long gap in the prosecution's timeline of events.

[Nifster]

yup....that poor little dope smoking fighting weasel. Oh but I guess that means I am a racist. Like Jaental I claim it is merely my culture.

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

Just more evidence that Traydmark™ wasn't attacking Zimmerman because Zimmerman was following him, but because he wanted to rob him. That is the gangsta MO when it comes to robbing people, and there are a million examples: Sucker punch the mark or start a confrontation and *then* sucker punch the mark.

Example: (notice the hoodie)

Sucker punch and rob

Isn't it amazing how nobody has brought this up?

Why?

Because.........

[Lucky9teen]

I’m surprised there isn’t a “Live Thread” of the closing testimonies...

The prosecution is pathetic....they are totally trying to go for the “emotional” argument, IMO. They have no FACTS to base their accusations on.

[kitkat]

I agree.

[SampleMan]

If Zimmerman is found guilty, the new American standard will be shoot, shovel, shut-up.

[Steve_Seattle]

"By allowing manslaughter, Miss Piggy the Judge essentially telegraphed to the jury that this is the “correct” verdict."

I think Florida law REQUIRES that the judge offer that option, as does the law in many states. In fact, I think in capital cases the US Supreme Court has mandated that option.

However, I agree that the availability of that option induces jurors to select it as a "compromise" position, regardless of how weak the evidence is. I think, therefore, that it is overall a bad thing, and that if prosecutors can't make the case for the stated crime, the defendant should walk. The current setup puts the onus on the jurors to "negotiate" the crime, as it were, rather than forcing the DA to get it right the first time and not overreach.

[jag.drafting]

Oh, and for anyone who thinks that God doesn’t still perform miracles: four minutes of silence in a room with a bunch of lawyers. Think about that one.
_________

ROFL!!!!

DITTO on the ROFL!!!!

[Steve_Seattle]

Thanks.

[wideawake]

When a prosecutor tells a jury to "listen to your heart" he's out of rational arguments.

[Retired Greyhound]

The rebuttal prosecutor keeps referring to Trayvon as a “child”.

Shameless.

[Secret Agent Man]

prosecution is wrapping up, and again, I cannot stomach watching these people.

They are closing with they want murder 2 because GZ said “effing punks” into the phone, and then inferring their entire case off those two words.

I am guessing since this is the foundation of their murder 2 argument, they sure don’t want the jury to linger on Trayvon’s “creepy ass cracker” comment the same way.

I cannot stomach these prosecutors. That is common language used by cops in the heat of dealing with someone, it’s off duty language certainly when kicking back with trusted friends - I know, I have cops in the family that talked about their day. Does that mean all those cops hunt people down to execute them? Or even if that’s an indication of their general intent towards others? Good grief.

Last hour is little St Martin vs evil cop wannabe.

Apparently it came out George was offered to become a Community On Patrol member where the cops would give him a uniform, car with amber lights on it, and instrumentation to actually patrol in such a fashion. George, being the hardcore cop wannabe, TURNED IT DOWN, said he didn’t want to do that.

The cop wannabe, DID NOT START the neighborhood watch program. Another woman in the neighborhood did. How did the hardcord cop wannabe not be the founder of the neighborhood watch program, so he could act like a cop through that program?

The cop wannabe, supposedly tracking and hunting down innocent St. Martin, when he got out of his car, not knowing where he had gone off to, why didn’t the guy who already had malice and ill will in his heart, why didn’t he pull his gun right then? Why did the cop wannabe let himself get sucker punched and beaten up and let St Martin grab for his gun while on top of him, before grabbing it and firing?

Why just one bullet? If he had ill will and malice? Why stop at one?

Where in the hardcore cop wannabe manual does it say it’s good procedure to let the person you’re “hunting” kick the crap out of you? What police training says that’s standard operating procedure?

Good grief.

[LibertarianLiz]

Zimmerman’s innocence is abundantly evident to anyone with half of a functioning brain.

I know! It is such an obvious case of self-defense that I can't believe it went to trial at all; except, of course, for the racial angle. We will see if the "ladies of the jury" are okay with sending an innocent man to jail just to avoid having blacks riot.

[Iron Munro]

By allowing manslaughter, Miss Piggy the Judge essentially telegraphed to the jury that this is the “correct” verdict.

I have the same thoughts.

I think the prosecutor proposed the other, lesser verdict of 3d degree murder yesterday as a Red Herring.

He really wanted the judge to approve the lesser charge of manslaughter, which she did. The prosecutor threw the other one in to give the defense something outlandish to protest.

He calculated that the judge wouldn't deny both requests and that the defense would expend their outrage arguing against the 3d degree murder charge.

It worked and his ploy allowed the judge to slip in the manslaughter verdict with nary a protest.

[Hotlanta Mike]

The prosecution is pathetic....they are totally trying to go for the “emotional” argument, IMO. They have no FACTS to base their accusations on.

---

They had to discredit the credibility of George Zimmerman to counter his statements to police.

[Steve_Seattle]

"When a prosecutor tells a jury to "listen to your heart" he's out of rational arguments."

"Listen to your heart" = Ignore the facts, ignore the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and look forward to the feel-good reception you'll get from the media if you find Zimmerman guilty. And BEWARE of the RIOTS that will be YOUR FAULT if you acquit. And FEAR for your own SAFETY if you acquit.

[426cuda]

Unfortunately if history is any guide Mr. Zimmerman will probably be unjustly convicted. It’s obvious through recent high profile trials that the majority of Americans have become too dumbed down and idiotic to handle serious, thoughtful jury duty. It’s time to change the system and have some type of professional juries.

[miss marmelstein]

This guy makes John Edwards look sincere!

[Hotlanta Mike]

Listen to your heart? What happened to justice is blind?

[SoFloFreeper]

I hope so. A lot of us were convinced that the Clown would be out of the Oval Office by now, too....

[ryan71]

“I’m not convinced on the looting. But yep, he’s gonna walk.” “So I’ll say we will find out”

If there are no riots or lootings this whole thing will have been a waste.....to the left.

Look for Obama to inflame things after the verdict.