The case is determined on the sum of the whole. There are many guilty verdicts determined by ambiguity. There have been both acquittals and guilty verdicts given on circumstatial evidence.
The jury gives a verdict based on who they believe.
APP - The Well Behaved Zimmerman TRIAL Thread
- Thread starter BRUTALITOPS
- Start date
The case is determined on the sum of the whole. There are many guilty verdicts determined by ambiguity. There have been both acquittals and guilty verdicts given on circumstatial evidence.
The jury gives a verdict based on who they believe.
Fact: Zimmerma was quoted as saying "Those %#&#'s always get away!"
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
IMHO:
If Zimmerman gets convicted, it will most likely be for involuntary manslaughter. The facts available can show that had Zimmerman heeded the 911 dispatch not to continue following Martin, the situation would not have evolved into a confrontation. It's nearly impossible to prove who confronted whom, what was said, who threw the first punch, etc., but we do know that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin AFTER Martin came up to his car and peered into the window and then ran away!
If Zimmerman gets convicted, it will most likely be for involuntary manslaughter. The facts available can show that had Zimmerman heeded the 911 dispatch not to continue following Martin, the situation would not have evolved into a confrontation. It's nearly impossible to prove who confronted whom, what was said, who threw the first punch, etc., but we do know that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin AFTER Martin came up to his car and peered into the window and then ran away!
gotta bring this thread back into focus, remember this thread isn't about what happened per se, but is for talking about the trial itself and the strategy/outcomes for both sides etc
Audio witness Dr. Nakasone:
"That type of sample is not fit for voice sample"
..
"sample not fit for voice comparison. Too short, long distance between phone and screams."
..
"Attempt to guess age of person from voice is rather complicated,"
..
"On this particular case, "it was impossible to determine" age of person,
..
[Jurors noting Nakasone testimony could not determine voice in this sample.]
..
Someone on twitter sums it up:
"So the prosecution that hoped to introduce testimony indicating who was screaming, instead presents expert who says he could not."
"That type of sample is not fit for voice sample"
..
"sample not fit for voice comparison. Too short, long distance between phone and screams."
..
"Attempt to guess age of person from voice is rather complicated,"
..
"On this particular case, "it was impossible to determine" age of person,
..
[Jurors noting Nakasone testimony could not determine voice in this sample.]
..
Someone on twitter sums it up:
"So the prosecution that hoped to introduce testimony indicating who was screaming, instead presents expert who says he could not."
o'mara on cross of officer singleton gets her to admit that she didn't think zimmerman "had ill will or hatred towards travyon martin"
the state must prove ill will hatred or spite in order to get a 2nd degree murder conviction
so far two states witnesses have said the opposite of that.
the state must prove ill will hatred or spite in order to get a 2nd degree murder conviction
so far two states witnesses have said the opposite of that.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
This is the first case, that I know of, where the Prosecutor was the lawyer for the accused.
FACT: Nakasone was a defense witness.
OPINION: The state called him as a witness to deflate his testimony and did get him to state that a person familiar with a voice could credibly attribute it.
just because both sides want him doesn't mean he's a defense witness, but I see what you are saying, there is strategy sometimes to calling certain witnesses before letting defense get first crack at them.
It would probably be more fair to say both sides wanted him as a witness.
So ok here is the rundown of all the serino stuff:
Two interviews, one easy on zimmerman, one where they are going much harder at him trying to poke holes in his story.
The police (serino/the woman cop who I forget the name of at the moment) ask him:
why not roll down windows when trayvon is circling car and say who zimmerman was?
zimmerman says he was afraid/fearful, didn't want to confront him
Investigators follow up with "why would he get out of his car if he was afraid?"
ask why didn't he identify himself as neighborhood watch at any point
They point out he paused in a certain location likely for around a minute or so. (probably scoping the area)
They ask when/how martin was smothering him and zimmerman couldn't provide much of an answer.
opinion: there does seem to a be a slight pause in the screaming imo, but it could also just have been brief contact and not full out smothering.
Zimmmerman in the tapes claims he is forgetting a lot of things, says he has a bad memory, doesn't know when/how/why certain things happend
(there wasn't much direct questioning from the prosecutor, they were mostly just playing the tapes)
Zimmerman said something retarded, said "he wasn't following him, he just went in the same direction"
Serino: "*laughs* that's following..."
opinion: my personal take on that is that when he "went in the same direction" he wasn't going with the intention of following him, per se, but figured he'd taken off and was getting the address like he said, especially when dispatcher asks if he's following him, zimmerman says yes, is told not to and he goes "ok"
Fact: following is not a crime and immaterial to defenses self defense claim. Self defense all comes down to state of mind and circumstances at the time of the shooting
Media claiming this is the first day State has been able to poke some holes in zimmermans story.
opinion: though this might just because they basically bombed last week
overall the tapes def probably put a bit of pressure on defense and it's probably states best day so far, though that isn't saying much.
** THAT SAID, o'mara beast-moded cross, which I will post below**
Two interviews, one easy on zimmerman, one where they are going much harder at him trying to poke holes in his story.
The police (serino/the woman cop who I forget the name of at the moment) ask him:
why not roll down windows when trayvon is circling car and say who zimmerman was?
zimmerman says he was afraid/fearful, didn't want to confront him
Investigators follow up with "why would he get out of his car if he was afraid?"
ask why didn't he identify himself as neighborhood watch at any point
They point out he paused in a certain location likely for around a minute or so. (probably scoping the area)
They ask when/how martin was smothering him and zimmerman couldn't provide much of an answer.
opinion: there does seem to a be a slight pause in the screaming imo, but it could also just have been brief contact and not full out smothering.
Zimmmerman in the tapes claims he is forgetting a lot of things, says he has a bad memory, doesn't know when/how/why certain things happend
(there wasn't much direct questioning from the prosecutor, they were mostly just playing the tapes)
Zimmerman said something retarded, said "he wasn't following him, he just went in the same direction"
Serino: "*laughs* that's following..."
opinion: my personal take on that is that when he "went in the same direction" he wasn't going with the intention of following him, per se, but figured he'd taken off and was getting the address like he said, especially when dispatcher asks if he's following him, zimmerman says yes, is told not to and he goes "ok"
Fact: following is not a crime and immaterial to defenses self defense claim. Self defense all comes down to state of mind and circumstances at the time of the shooting
Media claiming this is the first day State has been able to poke some holes in zimmermans story.
opinion: though this might just because they basically bombed last week
overall the tapes def probably put a bit of pressure on defense and it's probably states best day so far, though that isn't saying much.
** THAT SAID, o'mara beast-moded cross, which I will post below**
States Witness/Investigator Serino
*Some questions/answers are paraphrased because I was typing on the fly, but the answers are about as consistent and truthful as I can make them. There were two seperate interviews that questions are deriving from
did he seem like he was sidestepping? (in interview)
no
did he do anything to suggest he wasn't being straightforward?
no
--
I think this is for the first interview:
@travellwesh
"investigator says he was not concerned that Zimmerman had followed Trayvon and he didn't notice inconsistencies in previous 2 statements."
--
Anything about zimmerman that concerned you?
"stuck me as different/concerning he brought up going to work and class after the shooting"
zimmerman mentioned he could cancel it to do the walkthrough though, correct?
yes.
nothing in his words that suggested an uncaring attitude?
no
none of the witnesses facts of the events disagreed with zimmerman at that point?
no sir
*About slightly different statements between the two interviews*:
would you expect their to be differences in interviews?
yes
why?
we're not robots as people. I don't think I've ever heard someone remembering step by step stuff that occurred that they were involved in."
if he were to add in some brand new fact you would note that, correct?
yes sir.
you are attuned to look for those?
yes sir.
did you notice anything to bring to the juries attention today that caused you that concern.. that spidey sense that something is going wrong with what he is telling you?
no..
---
re: zimmerman changing his story slightly
"nothing major, no sir"
---
did what he say on the recreation video contradict any of the witness statements (around 15) you had gotten so far?
nothing directly
the reason you are having him say things in great detail is to weave out any inconsistencies or omissions
yes
anything inconsistent?
anything .. no.. nothing major
nothing to sound like he was making that story up, right?
no.
you talked about the following. He was consistent with you right? Never denied that, right?
yes. He said same thing
generally speaking, you might suggest video evidence to flush out truth?
yes.
and you say that to imply that if you find anything that doesn't sync with their story, that they'll be in big trouble
yes
and what were his words?
i believe his words were "thank god. im relieved someone videotaped it."
and what did that mean to you?
either he was telling the truth or a complete pathological liar, one of the two
anything that would indicate he is a pathological liar?
no
* Cross-examination picks up tomorrow *
*Some questions/answers are paraphrased because I was typing on the fly, but the answers are about as consistent and truthful as I can make them. There were two seperate interviews that questions are deriving from
did he seem like he was sidestepping? (in interview)
no
did he do anything to suggest he wasn't being straightforward?
no
--
I think this is for the first interview:
@travellwesh
"investigator says he was not concerned that Zimmerman had followed Trayvon and he didn't notice inconsistencies in previous 2 statements."
--
Anything about zimmerman that concerned you?
"stuck me as different/concerning he brought up going to work and class after the shooting"
zimmerman mentioned he could cancel it to do the walkthrough though, correct?
yes.
nothing in his words that suggested an uncaring attitude?
no
none of the witnesses facts of the events disagreed with zimmerman at that point?
no sir
*About slightly different statements between the two interviews*:
would you expect their to be differences in interviews?
yes
why?
we're not robots as people. I don't think I've ever heard someone remembering step by step stuff that occurred that they were involved in."
if he were to add in some brand new fact you would note that, correct?
yes sir.
you are attuned to look for those?
yes sir.
did you notice anything to bring to the juries attention today that caused you that concern.. that spidey sense that something is going wrong with what he is telling you?
no..
---
re: zimmerman changing his story slightly
"nothing major, no sir"
---
did what he say on the recreation video contradict any of the witness statements (around 15) you had gotten so far?
nothing directly
the reason you are having him say things in great detail is to weave out any inconsistencies or omissions
yes
anything inconsistent?
anything .. no.. nothing major
nothing to sound like he was making that story up, right?
no.
you talked about the following. He was consistent with you right? Never denied that, right?
yes. He said same thing
generally speaking, you might suggest video evidence to flush out truth?
yes.
and you say that to imply that if you find anything that doesn't sync with their story, that they'll be in big trouble
yes
and what were his words?
i believe his words were "thank god. im relieved someone videotaped it."
and what did that mean to you?
either he was telling the truth or a complete pathological liar, one of the two
anything that would indicate he is a pathological liar?
no
* Cross-examination picks up tomorrow *
Fact: He told the dispatcher he was following him. The claim that he was looking for a sign only came up afterwords.
Opinion: The fact that he may have been following him with the intent to confront him is certainly material to self defense claims.
Fact: your claim that it was not is an opinion not a fact.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Fact: He told the dispatcher he was following him. The claim that he was looking for a sign only came up afterwords.
Opinion: The fact that he may have been following him with the intent to confront him is certainly material to self defense claims.
Fact: your claim that it was not is an opinion not a fact.
Fact: People don't always comment on everything they're doing, at that particular moment.
Opinion: All that liberals have, regarding this incident.
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
Fact: Zimmerman is a filthy murderer.
Opinion: He will be acquitted.
Opinion: He will be acquitted.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
When was he found guilty of murder?
He did comment on what he was doing. He answered yes to the question of whether he was following him.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Who said that he didn't say that?
You're trying to make a case that he should have said:
"UH-Der; I'm following him and looking for an address, so I can tell you exactly where I'm at and by the way it's been raining tonight but it looks like tomorrow will be clear"
But instead of me acting like a liberal and speculating, why don't you show exactly where you think he should have let this be known.
please do not troll my thread, there are a billion zimmerman threads on here. This thread is for talking about the trial itself. keep the majority of ones comments to discussing the trial, or within the context of how something affects the trial.
tldr: trial thread trial thread trial thread. "Trial" in caps in title.
tldr: trial thread trial thread trial thread. "Trial" in caps in title.
You said people don't always comment on what they are doing. He did.
I am not saying he should have said anything. I am pointing out what he did say, at the time. He claimed later that he was not following but the dispatcher's tape contradicts that.
I am not speculating at all. You and grind are.
Last edited: