George Zmmerman trial begins...

[billc]

This is found through legal insurrection but it is posted at the Greta van Susteren site...video of George Zimmerman before he had a lawyer, before he was arrested, at the scene of the shooting, from the point of first contact with Martin, to where the shooting took place. He is with detectives from Sanford p.d. And he describes everything that he did.

http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com...he-had-a-lawyer-and-right-after-the-shooting/

This

re-enactment video will help you understand the scene of the shooting according to George Zimmerman and is in his words. It is also a horrible video for the prosecution.


Right after the shooting, Zimmerman took the police to the scene and talked to them….walked them through the incident. You will have to sit through a short ad to see the video — but this video is worth watching as it is George Zimmerman in his own words, showing you the scene and before he has a lawyer. Of course at the time of the video, he (like anyone involved in a shooting) had a motive to slant the facts in his favor but it is noteworthy that the reenactment with the police was done right after the incident and before he had a lawyer.

 

[billc]

A look at the case so far...

http://pjmedia.com/blog/zimmerman-the-backwards-trial-resumes/

But this is the George Zimmerman prosecution: a backwards case where the roles of the prosecution and defense are reversed.


Normally, prosecutors are careful to fully question each prosecution witness to obtain all of the evidence their testimony can produce. They do this so that the defense is not able to reveal previously undisclosed evidence, which tends to suggest prosecutorial concealment. But during the first week of this case, the prosecution established a pattern of asking only the bare minimum of their witnesses. In virtually every case, defense cross-examination reveals a great deal the prosecutors avoided bringing to light, and that information either fully supports George’s Zimmerman’s unchanging account, casts doubt on the “narrative” — which is actually the prosecution’s case — or both.


This bizarre turn of events has caused the prosecutors, particularly Bernie de la Rionda, to engage in the spectacle of aggressively cross-examining their own witnesses, trying to get them to mischaracterize, ignore, disown, or soft-pedal their testimony.


Another and disturbing pattern established by prosecution witnesses is that of changing their testimony in significant and ethically questionable ways. A number of prosecution witnesses have testified to important changes in their prior testimony they never before mentioned — not in multiple law enforcement interviews or depositions. This directly suggests that they’ve not only been coached, but perhaps that the subornation of perjury is involved.

Another thing this article reminds the reader about... Rachel Jeantel ...the "star," witness for the prosecution supported Zimmerman's story in that she specifically states that on the phone she heard Martin begin the encounter with Zimmerman...by asking him why he was following him. This goes to Zimmerman's testimony that Martin approached him...

 

[billc]

Hmmm...another pretty horrible day for the Prosecution...the lead detective on the case ended the day admitting that he believed Zimmerman when he said it was self-defense...

When the lead Detective was pressured to conduct what they were calling a "challenge meeting," with Zimmerman, a meeting after having interviewed him several other times, but this time would be aggressive and try to pressure a change to his story...the tactic...tell Zimmerman they had a video of the encounter from a witness of the whole thing...On video, when Zimmerman heard that the police had "video," of the entire encounter his response...for the whole jury and courtroom to see..."Thank God."

They also showed the video that Greta van Susteren of Fox cable news showed on her site...the one that was the walk through with Zimmerman and the lead Detectives from the Sanford P.D. the day after the shooting. Not a good day for the prosecution...

From legal insurrection.com and the analysis of another dismal day for the prosecution...

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/0...-challenges-very-foundation-of-states-charge/

On the stand was Chris Serino, who was the lead investigator for the Sanford Police Department on the Trayyvon Martin shooting. Defense counsel Mark O’Mara led cross-examination with his usual consummate skill, obtaining responses from this witness–remember, the State’s witness–that all but completely guts the State’s charge in this case.

At one point Serino was pressured to initiate a “challenge meeting” with Zimmerman, in which he would try to goad Zimmerman to making substantive changes to his testimony or to admit to a substantive omission from his prior testimony. The purpose of the “challenge meeting,” it was explained, is to try to break the suspects story and get to the truth. Indeed, the investigator might even pretend that some piece of incriminating evidence existed, or otherwise exaggerate evidence contrary to the suspect’s narrative, to try to find a chink in the suspect’s story.

The trouble, Serino recounted, is that he couldn’t really do an effective “challenge meeting” for the simple reason that “I just didn’t have much to challenge him WITH.” In this case, O’Mara asked, you didn’t have much to hit him with? “No sir,” answered Serino, “I did not.”

Nevertheless, the “challenge meeting” was held. In the absence of any real contrary evidence with which to challenge Serino, the Investigator pretended to have some ready to spring. They had discovered, he said, video footage of the events that evening. “And what did Zimmerman say when you told him that?” “He said, Thank God,” Serino answered.

And this is the capper to an all around bad day for the prosecution...

The last O’Mara question of the day, the last words the jury heard to take with them into the evening recess, could only be characterized as catastrophic for the State’s theory of the case. Looking directly at the man who had been the chief investigator on the case, who had possessed access to ever bit of evidence of any sort, who had interviewed, and re-interviewed, and re-re-interviewed–applying increasing from each interview to the next–O’Mara asked him:


“Do YOU think George Zimmerman was telling you the truth?”


Serino succinct answer: “Yes.”

 

[billc]

Some discussion of the problems with the prosecution...and a serious breach of ethics?

http://pjmedia.com/blog/zimmerman-the-backwards-trial-resumes/2/

West was able to elicit many stunning admissions. For example: the entire Scheme Team was present at Jeantel’s interview with de la Rionda, which was conducted in Sybrina Fulton’s living room with Fulton sitting next to Jeantel. This is a dumbfounding admission, as Fulton is Martin’s mother. No ethical prosecutor would conduct an interview himself; that’s what investigators are for, and one was present but asked not a single question. By conducting the interview, de la Rionda made himself a witness. No ethical prosecutor would allow private attorneys with a financial or political interest to have anything to do with a criminal case. No competent prosecutor would ever allow a victim’s relative to sit in on an interview, to say nothing of seating his most important witness next to the mother of the victim. All of these are incredible lapses of common sense, legal ethics, and professional protocol.

Jeantel was far from finished. She testified that after Martin spotted Zimmerman, he described him as a “creepy-*** cracker,” and shortly thereafter, several times, as a “n****.”

This was astonishing for many reasons. Jeantel had never before — not in multiple interviews with law enforcement, not in her interview with Crump, not in her deposition — said those things.

However, her manner of saying them was so garbled and hard to understand, that she and de la Rionda engaged in several minutes of dialogue with the court reporter as she struggled to get the testimony right. Jeantel also said that she thought Zimmerman might be a rapist, something else she had never before offered.

Selene Bahadoor, a resident, was visibly reluctant to say anything favorable about Zimmerman. She came up with testimony of “left to right” running sounds —

a version of the narrative has Zimmerman pursuing Martin. Bahadoor had not offered this testimony in two previous police interviews and a deposition, which was exposed by the defense.

She claimed to have feelings of sympathy for the Zimmermans and for Martin’s family, implying that she was not at all biased — but O’Mara got her to admit that she “liked” Martin’s Facebook page. He asked why she didn’t like Zimmerman’s, and she replied that she never had the opportunity.
He also confronted her with the fact that she signed a Change.org petition to “prosecute the killer of our son, Trayvon Martin.” She also admitted that, unlike her testimony that she did not want to be involved at all, she did a half-hour video with Matt Gutman of ABC News which may or may not have been aired.

 

[Big Don]

[h=2]Zimmerman Update — How Much Injury Is Required Before Self-Defense is Justified?[/h]

 

[billc]

Apparently, the prosecution is trying to discredit the testimony of their own witness...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/02/Zimmerman-investigating-officer-Serino

On Tuesday, the George Zimmerman trial continued with the prosecution attempting to discredit its own witness, investigating officer Chris Serino, after Serino testified that he found Zimmerman credible in his story. Two police officers have already testified that they found Zimmerman credible. The defense then asked Serino if his questions changed Zimmerman’s story at all. Serino said no.


Serino further testified that the medical examiner’s report backed Zimmerman’s contention that Trayvon Martin was on top during their scuffle, not the state’s contention that Zimmerman was on top.

Once we get into the physical evidence, will it show that the knees of Martins jeans had mud and grass stains, but Zimmerman's clothes had grass and mud on the back? Then what does the prosecution do?

 

[billc]

Well, in an attempt to limit the damage of "former detective," Serino's testimony, the Prosecution had his statement that he believed Zimmerman taken out of the offficial record...

Why do I say "former,' detective...because after he determined that a 2nd degree murder charge was too much...he was demoted to patrolman...

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/zimmerman-update-exclusive-mid-day-7-serino-more-ambivalent-osterman-supports-self-defense/

[h=3]Motion to Strike Key Serino Testimony Most Damaging to State
[/h] The Court opened today with a request from Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda, before the jury was present, to ask Judge Nelson to strike perhaps the most telling blow from yesterday’s testimony from former Investigator Chris Serino. You can see our analysis of that testimony from yesterday here:
[h=4]Zimmerman Trial Day 6 – Analysis & Video – State’s witness Chris Serino seriously undermines charge[/h] I say “former Investigator” because it turns out that although Chris Serino remains with the Sanford Police Department he was demoted from Investigatory to Partrolman a few months after the shooting for the apparent reason that he was willing to support a charge of manslaughter but not second degree murder: see here for details:
[h=4]Zimmerman Update — Investigator Chris Serino Demoted to Patrolman by Superiors[/h] BDLR argued that when O’Mara asked Serino if he believed Zimmerman to be telling the truth, Serino responded that he did, that such a testament of a law enforcement officer of a defendant was inappropriate and must be struck. He “ambushed” the defense with a detailed motion the State’s office had presumably spent much of the night preparing, and Judge Nelson required the defense to evaluate and respond to the motion while standing in court. O’Mara did the best he could under the circumstances, but Nelson elected to side with the State. When the jury was brought into the courtroom she played the audio of that part of O’Mara’s cross, and instructed the jury that the evidence was struck and not to be considered by them.

 

[Flying Crane]

Sorry for the late response FC. i just noticed this post. I don't have time right now to spend on all the obvious framing that has been done to Zimmerman. Read up on it and follow the trial. I think you'll understand.

No, I don't think so. I think it is just that Zimmerman goes to trial, and that the jury makes a decision. It is certainly not obvious to me that any framing is going on. Neither you nor I could make such a determination. That's what prosecution, defense, and juries are for.

 

[Tames D]

No, I don't think so. I think it is just that Zimmerman goes to trial, and that the jury makes a decision. It is certainly not obvious to me that any framing is going on. Neither you nor I could make such a determination. That's what prosecution, defense, and juries are for.

Never mind.

 

[billc]

And this is the medical examiner the prosecution called today...

http://www.fox30jax.com/content/top...-medical-examiner/fOK-GYLiMESM11Hjs5EpzQ.cspx

Laurie Weinstein worked in the medical examiner's office for about two years under Dr. Valerie Rao.

"It was horrible. You never knew what she was going to say."

Weinstein says Rao was hostile, even verbally abusive about her weight. "At the time, I was very heavy, 300 pounds. She referred to me as a Big Mac," said Weinstein.

Weinstein's is just one of many complaints we found in new documents Tuesday. According to an internal memo from the city, Rao called an employee a "redneck" and violated city polices numerous times. In many cases, we found Rao was never disciplined. We even found the city looked at having Rao removed.

It all stems from years of complaints about Dr. Rao's unsanitary procedures, washing her feet in the autopsy sink, using bare hands during procedures, and even accusations of exposing doctors to deadly diseases.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/0...ttle-prepared-to-introduce-college-records-2/

Wait a minute, the medical examienr who did the actual autopsy was Dr. Shiping Bao. Rao . . . Bao, close, but no cigar. Incidentally, if you’d like to see the actual autopsy report, you can find it here:
So, who was this Rao. It turns out she’s a medical examiner from the district that includes Jacksonville, which just happens to be the home city of this team of Prosecutors–including Angela Corey, Bernie de la Rionda, and the others–who was brought in at the Governor’s orders to displace the existing local team of prosecutors that had failed to bring a second degree murder charge against Zimmerman.

But Dr. Rao got a very lucky break, indeed, in the form of the favor of State Prosecutor Angela Corey, a powerful figure in State politics. Corey provided Dr. Rao with an interim appointment as Medical Examiner in Jacksonville, a position later changed to a permanent appointment by the Governor.
Then Corey’s prosecution team asked Dr. Rao to testify in Florida v. Zimmerman. She couldn’t very well re-do the long-ago completed autopsy, and indeed they focus wasn’t on Trayvon Martin at all. Instead, they asked her if she could express an opinion on the severity of the injuries suffered by George Zimmerman at the hands of Trayvon Martin on the night of February 26, 2012. She would be constrained, they cautioned her, by not actually having access to the patient himself, but would have to work from photographs and written medical reports from doctors that had examined Zimmerman.
As evidenced by her appearance as a State witness today, Dr. Rao was more than happy to help out.
Before we get into her testimony it is worth noting that the whole line of discussion is profoundly irrelevant to this case. The defense’s theory of the case is that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin in lawful self-defense. In order for this defensive use of deadly force to have been justified, Zimmerman must have been in reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm. He need NOT, however, have ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED death or grave bodily harm. Indeed, he need not have suffered so much as a scratch before he could use deadly force in self defense, so long as he reasonably perceived the force he was defending against as capable of causing death or grave bodily harm.

Again, not a real stellar day for the prosecution hoping to send Zimmerman to jail for 20 years...

 

[billc]

Is it possible the prosecution will call Martin's parent's to testify? Seems like a dumb idea because then the defense gets to ask..."Why was you son in living with his father instead of his mother?" Also..."What were his hobbies...?"

 

[Tames D]

Is it possible the prosecution will call Martin's parent's to testify? Seems like a dumb idea because then the defense gets to ask..."Why was you son in living with his father instead of his mother?" Also..."What were his hobbies...?"

Well, the way this prosecution dream team is working, they probably will. Then, after the defense is done with the witness, the dream team can do damage control again.
This trial is a waste of tax payers hard earned money.

 

[billc]

I was catching a little of Greta van Susteren's show...from what I have seen she is the most neutral of all the coverage...and one of the defense attorney analyst brought out that the defense got the prosecution's medical examiner to point out that there were abrasions on Martins hands...not a great day for the prosecution...

 

[Tames D]

I was catching a little of Greta van Susteren's show...from what I have seen she is the most neutral of all the coverage...and one of the defense attorney analyst brought out that the defense got the prosecution's medical examiner to point out that there were abrasions on Martins hands...not a great day for the prosecution...

And this is a surprise?

 

[billc]

Another bad day for the prosecution???

The medical examiner who actually saw the body seems to be saying that the facts line up with Zimmerman...?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/03/Prosecution-Witness-Trayvon-shirt-body

On Wednesday at the George Zimmerman trial, the prosecution called yet another witness who ended up testifying for the defense: Florida Department of Law Enforcement firearm analyst Amy Siewert. The prosecution had contended that George Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon Martin and pressed his gun into Martin’s chest before firing and killing him. Siewert testified, however, that there was no forensic evidence that Zimmerman had pressed the gun to Martin’s chest. In fact, the gunpowder residue and other material evidence showed that the gun was touched to Martin’s shirt, and that Martin’s shirt was not pressed to his chest, implying that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and that his shirt was hanging down when Zimmerman shot him.

ANd then the prosecution gets his college records admitted into the record...to have the defense use them to undermine the state's case...


http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/zimmerman-update-exclusive-mid-day-state-wins-evidentiary-battle-loses-testimony-war/

In fact, the testimony of both Professors overwhelmingly favored the defense. Let’s consider each in turn.

West’s cross-examination of Carter, however, was devastating for the State. Carter described Zimmerman as “one of my best students,” and asked what grade he had assigned he answered, “an A.” (Interestingly, when Captain Carter had first entered the court room he had said, “Hi,” to Zimmerman.) Then West led Carter through a lengthy discussion–a lecture, really–of Florida’s self-defense law. It was like a legal seminar for the jury, and West particularly emphasized that there was no legal requirement to have actually incurred any injury whatever before you can act in self-defense. Carter even opined that you definitely would not want to wait to act in self-defense until you had been seriously injured. As the State saw the narrative spinning against them they repeatedly objected, constraining West’s cross. By then, however, the damage had largely been done to the State’s theory of the case.

And the other professor...

Professor Scott Pleasant, Part 3

Again on cross, however, things turned badly against the State. Under O’Mara’s questioning it became clear that much of the content put into evidence by the State may have been contained in the class textbook but was never actually covered in class. The greatest blow, however, came with O’Mara’s last question (as has happened before) when he asked Pleasant what Zimmerman had told him about his career goals. Pleasant answered,”he said he wanted to be an attorney, and eventually become a Prosecutor.”

And they look at the forensic examiner about the gun shot wound...

With the case presented so far...has "beyond a reasonable doubt," been reached?

 

[elder999]

At the end of it all, this will be the moment that started the acquittal riots:

It’s imminent injury,” Carter explained. “Or imminent fear. So the fact alone that there isn’t an injury doesn’t necessarily mean that the person did not have a real apprehension of fear. The fact that there were injuries have a tendency to show or support that that person had a reasonable apprehension of fear.” “You don’t have to wait until you’re almost dead until you can defend yourself?” West asked.
“No, I would advise you probably don’t do that,” Carter replied.
That response prompted several seconds of laughter from the usually-emotionless Zimmerman before he was able to look downward to regain his composure.

 

[ballen0351]

At the end of it all, this will be the moment that started the acquittal riots:

Why because he laughed at something that was funny? No what will cause the riots are a bunch of punks that are already planning a riot just to riot. They dont give a crap about the trial they just want an excuse

 

[billc]

considering the whole courtroom laughed at the response...only those determined to ignore what actually came out in the trial and are determined to use imagined racism as an excuse to riot.

 

[billc]

A look at the trial from liberal columnist Eric Zorn...the key witness...

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/trayvon-martin-case/

Observations:
1. The fatal confrontation didn't take place anywhere near Martin's father's fiancee's house. This badly undermines the "Martin was really scared of Zimmerman and so was hiding from him" narrative now favored by the presumed-guilty crowd. Unless....I know! Martin was confused about where he was when he was talking to Jeantel.

2. "Creepy-*** cracker" sounds like racial profiling to me. And like the animus was mutual.

3. Stitch this together with other witness testimony so far and you have a very murky story, at best. Zimmerman's own account is far from the only one with holes and contradictions in it. So far, it looks like the state's approach here is to tell the jury--

This was a strange, sad and confrontation that had a tragic outcome. Since you can't be sure what happened because these evolving, contradictory stories don't resolve into a clear narrative and are sometimes at odds with the known facts, you can't be sure that Zimmerman acted in self defense therefore you should find him guilty.

This certainly works for lots of folks, folks whose liberal inclinations might, in other circumstances, see the following pattern --

High profile crime

Sympathetic victim

Unsympathetic defendant

Evidence suggesting innocence or doubt minimized or explained away with farfetched theories.

Evidence suggesting guilt magnified and then stitched together with conjecture, surmise and supposition.

-- a recipe for wrongful conviction.

I've covered a lot of such cases. The blinders go on early. The gaps and inconsistencies in the case are filled by sympathy for the victim and rage at the defendant.

A look at the distances involved, and the timing of events by liberal columnist Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune...

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/..._police-dispatcher-timeline-fatal-altercation

 

[Steve]

Quick question on the trial. Everyone is presuming that Martin had Zimmerman mounted. Can a lay person tell the difference between mount and guard?

I was listening to the autopsy information this morning, and it occurred to me that Martins and zimmermans injuries are what I'd expect from guard.

Zimmerman was training "mma." It's reasonable to presume he knew what guard is and how to recover guard from mount.

As experienced martial artists, we all know that this



Is a much more dominant and dangerous position that this.



Although both look bad for the guy on the bottom, the latter picture depicts what I would consider a neutral position.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD