APP - The Well Behaved Zimmerman TRIAL Thread

Pete Campbell said:
but it can't. So I don't really understand your line of thought.

Maybe you were being more philosophical than I interpreted.



perhaps, but there were many that were, and when you have an avalanche of witnesses I don't think you can deny them having a strong effect on the minds of the jurors.
Click to expand...

I was arguing that the proof of who was screaming is of limited value, especially to the defense. Even if it can be established it's value is mainly about the degree of the crime. IF IT COULD be proven that it was Trayvon it would be pretty devastating to the defense and do a lot to establish depraved mind. If it could be proven that it was Zimmerman it might create doubt about the depraved mind but it does nothing to establish that Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force.

I don't think the witnesses proved anything. Again, they are at best making an honest guess, could easily be influenced by bias or they are just lying.
 
Pete Campbell said:
[/COLOR]

it hasn't been proven yet baxter. The State has rested their case. There is no more evidence coming in on behalf of the state. Anything significant pertaining to that issue would have already come into play. It's non-existent. The martins had 3 witnesses, two which at one point said it was not trayvon. The defense brought in 7(?) all definitively saying it was george.
Click to expand...

I don't see how it is evidence, it is all opinion, so, George had more people with opinions, as a juror, I wouldn't care, I would simply say predictable. They allow personal opinions, but not expert opinion, doesn't make sense to me.
 
Pete Campbell said:
Did the defense decide not to bring in the THC evidence? I have heard random things pertaining to that.
Click to expand...

I hope they do, then the prosecution can counter with evidence that pot makes you mellow, less aggressive, he didn't want to fight George, he just wanted to eat his Skittles!
 
Pete Campbell said:
Did the defense decide not to bring in the THC evidence? I have heard random things pertaining to that.
Click to expand...

The judge ruled originally that the toxicology reports couldn't be hrought up in the opening arguments. Yesterday she ruled it could be after the achinese doctor's testimony. However, :t could lead to the depressent qualities of THC as well as the state bringing out what drugs were in Zimmy's system too.
 
Rana said:
I hope they do, then the prosecution can counter with evidence that pot makes you mellow, less aggressive, he didn't want to fight George, he just wanted to eat his Skittles!
Click to expand...

it also makes you paranoid, defense might be able to argue that the way he perceived zimmerman as a "threat" was overblown because of his paranoia, and that a sober person may not have perceived zimmerman that way.
 
I posted this on another site:

Opinion/Analysis:

Tactically, it probably plays well for the defense when the jury demographics is mostly middle aged women from the south.

But ignoring that, lets get to the truth of the matter:

1) Zimmerman in his call to the dispatcher mentioned that the "guy looks like he's on drugs or something." For the defense, bringing the toxicology report into play is useful because it lends zimmerman credibility with regards to his judgement that night. Whatever ones stance is on weed, it's likely more understandable that if you see a guy derping around in the rain and he looks high (and you dont know for sure what drug he might be on), that this might make an individual look rather shady to you. Maybe it's not because trayvon is black! Maybe he was actually acting rather odd!

The issue helps to take some of the wind out of the States sails who have alluded that the only reason zimmerman followed trayvon was because he was black.

It allows the defense to claim that zimmerman was RIGHT to be suspicious, that trayvon WAS acting odd. That's what they will probably argue.

2) Weed is well documented to make some people paranoid to varying degrees. I don't know if the defense will bring up this argument, but they might be able to argue that zimmerman wasn't being all that stalk-y or scary, but that because of trayvon having THC in his system, trayvon wasn't an accurate judge of the situation, and thus ended up being more paranoid than a sober person might, which could have lead to him being unnecessarily scared and on guard.

_

At the end of the day though, the State clearly didn't want this in because they believe it's going to hurt their case, so I can't imagine that this issue is anything other than a win for the defense today.

[end of post from yesterday]

+ + + + + + +

I made this post before learning there was only trace amounts in TM's system. I don't really know what the defense should do in this regard, it could open up other can of worms, make the defense look like they are overreaching, etc. Plus like ~45% of americans admit to smoking weed at one time in their lives, a majority support legalization, two states it's already legal, other states it's medicinal (with a wink and a nod), so it stands to reason most people dont think weed is a big deal anymore, and that many jury members have direct experience with weed and not think it's a big deal, or know someone that has experience with weed.

I think the best thing defense would get out of bringing this in (other than tricking the jury with reefer madness) might be with regards to what I said in point 1, that it lends zimmerman some credibility pertaining to his observations that night.
 
i dont have much to say with re: to witnesses anymore. I am not going to repeat the same thing I have said everyday. Especially now that we are in the defense stage, (opinion): pretty much every witness is going to give at minimum reasonable doubt.
 
Howey said:
Zimmy was on Temazepam.

http://www.examiner.com/article/the...rman-was-taking-when-he-killed-trayvon-martin

GLOAT: Bring it on!
Click to expand...

Man everyone is on adderall these days. I know women who fake attention problems to get it, it makes you effortlessly thin. No wonder that guy gained so much weight. He must have gotten off of it so that it would be harder to use against him (at least in his mind). Yeah, those people are speed freaks and they ain't no fun. They are thin though!
 
Howey said:
.
Click to expand...

as I said, he wasn't tested, so saying what he was on or how he was influenced at the time of the incident is absolutely baseless, and there is no evidence for it.

That said the defense dropped the THC stuff. They also might have dropped the crump stuff. I wonder if they threw out red herrings to make the state have to spread themselves thin for possible rebuttal arguments.
 
Pete Campbell said:
zimm wasn't tested after the altercation so the state literally has zero evidence as to what zimmerman might have had in his system.
Click to expand...

Howey's source....
according to the paramedic incident report, Trayvon Martin's shooter was on the prescription drug Temazepam which is known to cause insomnia and anxiety.

I don't know why they did not introduce this.

Trayvon was below the level of impairment.
 
oh.

my.

fucking.

god.

zimmerman seems like he might want to testify.

What a fucking retard if that's what happens.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Howey's source....
according to the paramedic incident report, Trayvon Martin's shooter was on the prescription drug Temazepam which is known to cause insomnia and anxiety.

I don't know why they did not introduce this.

Trayvon was below the level of impairment.
Click to expand...

as far as I am aware, and perhaps I am incorrect, maybe I heard something in the trial incorrectly, but I thought zimmerman was not tested at the crime scene. I heard talking heads talking about this issue too saying it wasn't fair that the "victim" was tested but not zimmerman. The incident report might allude to what he takes as a part of a medical regime, but not that he was on it at the time.
 
Howey said:
Glad you didn't make that bet?


Bwahahaha...

That was opinion.

Why not? The cop wannabe's already blabbed all over!
Click to expand...

opinion/analysis:

I am hoping the lawyers will still reign him in, but they couldn't reign him in with regards to the hannity interview, so who knows. I think zimmerman is more convinced of his innocence than I am. He has some hurbis and a very strong desire to get on his soapbox.

My opposition to this is obviously tactical. It just makes zero sense for him to testify. I posted this somewhere else:

it's simple risk vs. reward. zimmermans testimony is already out there. The jury has already heard his statements and his account of the events. He pretty much has absolutely zero to gain from being on the stand, maybe a few humanizing or sympathy points but that's about it.

On the other hand, he might be tripped up, he might fumble his words, he might appear nervous (understandably so), he might say something he doesn't mean by accident, and he could totally tank himself. That speaks nothing to the actual truth of the matter, but it's just logical when you have almost no potential for gains but a non-zero probability of losses, it doesn't make sense to take the stand. The State hasn't proven their case.

+ + +

This case is almost a ship-it win at this point. Zimmerman testifying introduces soooo much unnecessary variance. This would be so fucking dumb. Plus I am anxious to see this go to the jury. If he gets in the stand, he'll be there till next week probably. Jodi Arias style.
 
Pete Campbell said:
opinion/analysis:

I am hoping the lawyers will still reign him in, but they couldn't reign him in with regards to the hannity interview, so who knows. I think zimmerman is more convinced of his innocence than I am. He has some hurbis and a very strong desire to get on his soapbox.

My opposition to this is obviously tactical. It just makes zero sense for him to testify. I posted this somewhere else:

it's simple risk vs. reward. zimmermans testimony is already out there. The jury has already heard his statements and his account of the events. He pretty much has absolutely zero to gain from being on the stand, maybe a few humanizing or sympathy points but that's about it.

On the other hand, he might be tripped up, he might fumble his words, he might appear nervous (understandably so), he might say something he doesn't mean by accident, and he could totally tank himself. That speaks nothing to the actual truth of the matter, but it's just logical when you have almost no potential for gains but a non-zero probability of losses, it doesn't make sense to take the stand. The State hasn't proven their case.

+ + +

This case is almost a ship-it win at this point. Zimmerman testifying introduces soooo much unnecessary variance. This would be so fucking dumb. Plus I am anxious to see this go to the jury. If he gets in the stand, he'll be there till next week probably. Jodi Arias style.
Click to expand...

This is the first time you have stated you aren't convinced of his innocence, very interesting. Why now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top