Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

[The Commish]

You like qualifying with lots of "ifs" and "buts" don't you?

Because without any proof of what happened exactly I'm supposed to say Zimmerman was acting in self defense, rather than If he was.. ?

How else are we supposed to discuss the points that we don't have evidence to support in not with "If"s and "I think"s...? Outside of the facts and evidence of the case it's all speculation.. At least my speculations aren't contradictory to the facts and evidence of the case..

Why don't you tell us how you think it went down.. And if your speculation contradicts evidence, maybe explain that a little for us.. Like 'John' seeing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman.. Start from the beginning, spell it out for us..

My theory is largely irrelevant so I haven't spent hardly any time coming up with what I think happened. I don't know if the dude is innocent or guilty and don't pretend to. As I listen, I weigh the information presented and think about all the things that could have happened and what was most likely to happen of those various things. So, right now I am at the point where I believe Zimmerman saw a kid he didn't know. He made a snap judgment about this kid and called the cops. He talked to the cops and ignored their suggestion. Had he stopped when he was told following wasn't necessary, he would have been sitting in his truck, waiting for the cops to come. He was doing "something" outside of his truck. That's all I've got right now.

You ignore some things in this speculation.. The operator didn't suggest he didn't need to follow until he was well outside of his truck and on down the road.. So he wouldn't have been in his truck still if he followed the suggestion. Also, how do you know he didn't follow the suggestion and stop following? The timeline and location the altercation took place, suggests Trayvon either never left the area.. Or doubled back to confront Zimmerman.. How do you account for this?

I don't know that he stopped or didn't stop. If he stopped, he'd just be a guy standing out in the rain waiting for the police to arrive (because he didn't go back to his truck). If it were me, and I was told it wasn't necessary to continue following him, I wouldn't just stop and stand in the rain. I'd go back to my truck. Putting myself in Martin's shoes, if someone is following me around and I'm not familiar with the area (not sure if that's true or not) I go find a place to hide and stay put. I've seen enough movies to know once your hidden, moving isn't smart In that case, the only way I'm found is if someone finds me by continuing to look for me. I'll probably be able to give more educated guesses once we learn a bit about Martin's personality, temperment etc.

 

[pantherclub]

You like qualifying with lots of "ifs" and "buts" don't you? That day, police were called to a scene where a kid was dead and his killer was beaten up. I think there is plenty of probable cause for the guy to be detained and questioned for more information. If you disagree, so be it

. Alternatively, you were suggesting that it's ok to arrest someone and charge them with a crime without enough evidence to convict.. Which is something else entirely..

I can assure you that it's perfectly OK to arrest someone and charge them without enough evidence to convict. Any case on probable cause will tell you that.

Maybe you can explain why you edited out a sentence in that paragraph?And no, it's not ok.. Without evidence to convict, the case is thrown out... Was of time, money, and an infringement on that persons civil liberties..

In a probable cause case, there would be some evidence that suggests to the arresting officer that the law was broken, and that there would be more evidence they can extract from you. Probable cause doesn't give them the right to arrest you and charge you, it gives them the right to detain you, investigate, question, search...

I ignored it because we're not talking about the standard to detain and question. We're talking about the standard to arrest. Which is probable cause. Which is defined as evidence of such nature to give a reasonable man a suspicion that a crime has occurred. And the case law has specifically stated that such a standard does not mean that the State must establish a prima facie case (or in other words a rebuttable presumption that all elements of the crime have been committed). You are suggesting that the State must establish such a prima facie case. That is flat out wrong. It's not a question of opinion. It's a question of clearly established constitutional law.

There is no summary judgment in a criminal trial. The remedy for insufficient evidence in a prosecution is acquital, either through jury verdict or through a Rule 29 motion made after the close of the state's evidence, the close of the case, or the verdict.

Probable cause in this case is what got Zimmerman detained... So obviously it is relevant.. We're talking about the Zimmerman case.. And after detaining him the police knew they did not yet have enough evidence to convict, so he was released... There was obvious intent by you here, deleting 1 sentence from a double quote post..

People are indicted after being released subsequent to detention and questioning all the time. Usually because the prosecutor is going to present evidence to the grand jury. Believe me when I say that the only relevance that the probable cause to detain Zimmerman has on this case is whether evidence obtained by questioning subject to that detention may be admitted at trial. Again, this is not a matter of opinion. We can look this stuff up. My intention is not to make you look bad. Or to get Zimmerman convicted. My intention is very simple. When someone talking out of their ### misstates a proposition of law, and I am aware of that fact, I tend to correct them. Because one cool thing about the law is thatwe have lots of established answers. We can look at cases. Such as Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 419 ("[W]e do not retreat from the established propositions that only the probability, and not a prima facie showing, of criminal activity is the standard of probable cause.").

That's going to blister hustler

 

[Carolina Hustler]

You like qualifying with lots of "ifs" and "buts" don't you?

Because without any proof of what happened exactly I'm supposed to say Zimmerman was acting in self defense, rather than If he was.. ?

How else are we supposed to discuss the points that we don't have evidence to support in not with "If"s and "I think"s...? Outside of the facts and evidence of the case it's all speculation.. At least my speculations aren't contradictory to the facts and evidence of the case..

Why don't you tell us how you think it went down.. And if your speculation contradicts evidence, maybe explain that a little for us.. Like 'John' seeing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman.. Start from the beginning, spell it out for us..

My theory is largely irrelevant so I haven't spent hardly any time coming up with what I think happened. I don't know if the dude is innocent or guilty and don't pretend to. As I listen, I weigh the information presented and think about all the things that could have happened and what was most likely to happen of those various things. So, right now I am at the point where I believe Zimmerman saw a kid he didn't know. He made a snap judgment about this kid and called the cops. He talked to the cops and ignored their suggestion. Had he stopped when he was told following wasn't necessary, he would have been sitting in his truck, waiting for the cops to come. He was doing "something" outside of his truck. That's all I've got right now.

You ignore some things in this speculation.. The operator didn't suggest he didn't need to follow until he was well outside of his truck and on down the road.. So he wouldn't have been in his truck still if he followed the suggestion. Also, how do you know he didn't follow the suggestion and stop following? The timeline and location the altercation took place, suggests Trayvon either never left the area.. Or doubled back to confront Zimmerman.. How do you account for this?

I don't know that he stopped or didn't stop. If he stopped, he'd just be a guy standing out in the rain waiting for the police to arrive (because he didn't go back to his truck). If it were me, and I was told it wasn't necessary to continue following him, I wouldn't just stop and stand in the rain. I'd go back to my truck. Putting myself in Martin's shoes, if someone is following me around and I'm not familiar with the area (not sure if that's true or not) I go find a place to hide and stay put. I've seen enough movies to know once your hidden, moving isn't smart In that case, the only way I'm found is if someone finds me by continuing to look for me. I'll probably be able to give more educated guesses once we learn a bit about Martin's personality, temperment etc.

Zimmerman said he was on his way back to the truck when Trayvon confronted him. So maybe he was doing what you would have done...

 

[Lutherman2112]

Any lawyers know if Z will be tried for Manslaughter through this proceeding, does FL have automatic inclusion of lesser charges?

State hasn't even sniffed at proving the depraved mind standard of Murder 2.

Yep, State should have had this wrapped up hours ago.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

That's going to blister hustler

toast me.. not blister me..

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

HLN is horrible. Two minutes of coverage, two minutes of commercials.

Yep. Does any other network have it?

http://www.orlandosentinel.com no garbage spin like HLN

It's the live broadcast of the court room with an annoying "anchor" taking them in and out of break Occasionally they will have a person come on and explain what the prosecution or defense is trying to accomplish in specific series of questions....spin indeed. Unless you're talking about the night time shows, which I'm guessing disagree with you based on your comment.

Yeah I caught the night time shows that were trying to mimic Around the Horn with 5 pro-martin backers screaming about how Z only profiles black youths because they are BLACK. and 1 guy that I believe lives in the neighborhood explaining how George was able to assist police with a burglary in progress largely due to his efforts, which the other 5 kept talking over, absolutely horrendous.

I will say I enjoyed the chick that played the role of Martin as she mounted some guy in a suit portraying Zimmerman, I'm pretty sure he popped one.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Then why go through the trouble of deleting a sentence at all if it didn't matter.. You were taking what I said out of context..

You didn't qualify your statement. You said that arresting someone absent sufficient evidence to convict was unconsitutional (or improper, or subject to getting the case thrown out or whatever imprecise phrasing you used).

That is one specific statement. It is not true. It does not rely whatsoever on whether the State had probable cause to detain Zimmerman for questioning. Or to execute a search warrant. Those are separate questions. They'd likely be answered the same way, but they are frankly irrelevant. The State investigated for weeks after questioning Zimmerman. They aren't forced to rely on the same evidentiary record they had when they questioned and released him.

 

[kentric]

Can we please merge this with the Dexter thread.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Then why go through the trouble of deleting a sentence at all if it didn't matter.. You were taking what I said out of context..

You didn't qualify your statement. You said that arresting someone absent sufficient evidence to convict was unconsitutional (or improper, or subject to getting the case thrown out or whatever imprecise phrasing you used).

That is one specific statement. It is not true. It does not rely whatsoever on whether the State had probable cause to detain Zimmerman for questioning. Or to execute a search warrant. Those are separate questions. They'd likely be answered the same way, but they are frankly irrelevant. The State investigated for weeks after questioning Zimmerman. They aren't forced to rely on the same evidentiary record they had when they questioned and released him.

They are reliant.. Why would the police arrest Zimmerman for probable cause after they had already detained and questioned him for probable cause, found they didn't have enough evidence, and let him go?

 

[pantherclub]

Then why go through the trouble of deleting a sentence at all if it didn't matter.. You were taking what I said out of context..

You didn't qualify your statement. You said that arresting someone absent sufficient evidence to convict was unconsitutional (or improper, or subject to getting the case thrown out or whatever imprecise phrasing you used).

That is one specific statement. It is not true. It does not rely whatsoever on whether the State had probable cause to detain Zimmerman for questioning. Or to execute a search warrant. Those are separate questions. They'd likely be answered the same way, but they are frankly irrelevant. The State investigated for weeks after questioning Zimmerman. They aren't forced to rely on the same evidentiary record they had when they questioned and released him.

They are reliant.. Why would the police arrest Zimmerman for probable cause after they had already detained and questioned him for probable cause, found they didn't have enough evidence, and let him go?

Reliant?

 

[The Commish]

HLN is horrible. Two minutes of coverage, two minutes of commercials.

Yep. Does any other network have it?

http://www.orlandosentinel.com no garbage spin like HLN

It's the live broadcast of the court room with an annoying "anchor" taking them in and out of break Occasionally they will have a person come on and explain what the prosecution or defense is trying to accomplish in specific series of questions....spin indeed. Unless you're talking about the night time shows, which I'm guessing disagree with you based on your comment.

Yeah I caught the night time shows that were trying to mimic Around the Horn with 5 pro-martin backers screaming about how Z only profiles black youths because they are BLACK. and 1 guy that I believe lives in the neighborhood explaining how George was able to assist police with a burglary in progress largely due to his efforts, which the other 5 kept talking over, absolutely horrendous.

I will say I enjoyed the chick that played the role of Martin as she mounted some guy in a suit portraying Zimmerman, I'm pretty sure he popped one.

That's not what's on HLN right now.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Then why go through the trouble of deleting a sentence at all if it didn't matter.. You were taking what I said out of context..

You didn't qualify your statement. You said that arresting someone absent sufficient evidence to convict was unconsitutional (or improper, or subject to getting the case thrown out or whatever imprecise phrasing you used).

That is one specific statement. It is not true. It does not rely whatsoever on whether the State had probable cause to detain Zimmerman for questioning. Or to execute a search warrant. Those are separate questions. They'd likely be answered the same way, but they are frankly irrelevant. The State investigated for weeks after questioning Zimmerman. They aren't forced to rely on the same evidentiary record they had when they questioned and released him.

They are reliant.. Why would the police arrest Zimmerman for probable cause after they had already detained and questioned him for probable cause, found they didn't have enough evidence, and let him go?

They did not "detain and question him for probable cause." I don't even know what you mean by that. Suspects are detained, questioned and released all the time. In many, many cases, those suspects are subsequently indicted. The decision to not indict at one point is simply that. A decision to not indict at that time. It is in no way an admission that probable cause did not exist at that time.

 

[jon_mx]

Well, the little HLN analysis and pictures that are shown are all very sympathetic towards Martin.

They keep saying this did not have to happen, and how "unfortunately the defense will argue...."

 

[Lutherman2112]

Seems like a quality, no commentary stream:

http://bcove.me/uk6vs6su

 

[kentric]

Seems like a quality, no commentary stream:

http://bcove.me/uk6vs6su

Also on yahoo

http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-murder-trial--live-video-and-chat-222843188.html

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I have watched very little of the trial today. Can anyone tell me who all the have had on the stand today, and what conclusions you've come to from that testimony?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Bahadoor is collapsing like a house of cards

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

I have watched very little of the trial today. Can anyone tell me who all the have had on the stand today, and what conclusions you've come to from that testimony?

tweet by tweet:

https://twitter.com/LawSelfDefense

more from hannity thread (strict posting rules, not a free for all like in here):

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?2441378-Official-Zimmerman-Jury-Trial-Thread&p=102964496&posted=1#post102964496

Someone made mention that the infamous knock-knock joke was also used in the O.J. Simpson trial, epic if true!

 

[Slapdash]

I have watched very little of the trial today. Can anyone tell me who all the have had on the stand today, and what conclusions you've come to from that testimony?

tweet by tweet:

https://twitter.com/LawSelfDefense

more from hannity thread (strict posting rules, not a free for all like in here):

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?2441378-Official-Zimmerman-Jury-Trial-Thread&p=102964496&posted=1#post102964496

Someone made mention that the infamous knock-knock joke was also used in the O.J. Simpson trial, epic if true!

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I have watched very little of the trial today. Can anyone tell me who all the have had on the stand today, and what conclusions you've come to from that testimony?

tweet by tweet:

https://twitter.com/LawSelfDefense

more from hannity thread (strict posting rules, not a free for all like in here):

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?2441378-Official-Zimmerman-Jury-Trial-Thread&p=102964496&posted=1#post102964496

Someone made mention that the infamous knock-knock joke was also used in the O.J. Simpson trial, epic if true!

HFS! Look at that guys twitter history. No wonder JoJo loves him. A total hack. His opinions (like when JoJo quoted him on PJMedia) were set before he ever heard a word.

Check this...

Andrew Branca, LOSD ‏@LawSelfDefense 23 Apr

How soon before (Boston) Bomber #2 gets a tenured faculty position at Harvard?

 

[Lutherman2112]

I wanna push one of those elevator buttons sooooooo badly.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

If this is the best the State has for witnesses this will be a joke of a trial.

No way in hell Zimmerman needs to take the stand (so far).

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Anyone have a per witness take on the trial today? I don't care who.. I'd be happy with Tim's take even..

 

[Slapdash]

Anyone have a per witness take on the trial today? I don't care who.. I'd be happy with Tim's take even..

I have been looking at the live blog here: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/06/25/george-zimmerman-trial-live-blog-day-2?hpt=hp_t2

 

[kentric]

Anyone have a per witness take on the trial today? I don't care who.. I'd be happy with Tim's take even..

I believe four witnesses. Sargeant who came to scene and tried to revive Trayvon - very credible.

Neighborhood watch professional. stated that Z acted outside norms in following and not just calling police however, she said that it is natural to investigate situations about suspicious individuals/situations (i.e., a person walking in rain looking in windows, etc.)

President of homeowner association - older gent who seemed lost.

Police Forensics woman - so-so testimony.

Witness who heard fight moving left to right - she is being drilled by defense because the L to R was never mentioned in testimonial docs before.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Anyone have a per witness take on the trial today? I don't care who.. I'd be happy with Tim's take even..

I believe four witnesses. Sargeant who came to scene and tried to revive Trayvon - very credible.

Neighborhood watch professional. stated that Z acted outside norms in following and not just calling police however, she said that it is natural to investigate situations about suspicious individuals/situations (i.e., a person walking in rain looking in windows, etc.)

President of homeowner association - older gent who seemed lost.

Police Forensics woman - so-so testimony.

Witness who heard fight moving left to right - she is being drilled by defense because the L to R was never mentioned in testimonial docs before.

What did the sarge say? Any sticking testimony there one way or the other?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

State (through this witness they paid off) is trying to make the claim that there was separation between Martin and Zimmerman (hence why she keeps saying she only saw 1 body after the gunshot went off).

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

this witness signed a petition to prosecute Zimmerman

 

[avoiding injuries]

Anyone have a per witness take on the trial today? I don't care who.. I'd be happy with Tim's take even..

I believe four witnesses. Sargeant who came to scene and tried to revive Trayvon - very credible.Neighborhood watch professional. stated that Z acted outside norms in following and not just calling police however, she said that it is natural to investigate situations about suspicious individuals/situations (i.e., a person walking in rain looking in windows, etc.)

President of homeowner association - older gent who seemed lost.

Police Forensics woman - so-so testimony.

Witness who heard fight moving left to right - she is being drilled by defense because the L to R was never mentioned in testimonial docs before.

What did the sarge say? Any sticking testimony there one way or the other?

Sarge was matter of fact and didnt really sway anything one way or the other. Neighborhood watch professional was a big help to the defense. Very complimentary of GZ and defended him well. A letter of recommendation/acknowledgement she wrote about him was ruled inadmissible.

 

[Gawain]

this witness signed a petition to prosecute Zimmerman

Could this be brought up? Tougher to look impartial.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

this witness signed a petition to prosecute Zimmerman

Could this be brought up? Tougher to look impartial.

They mentioned March 20th in the trial, could be the same thing.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

10:35 a.m. ET: Dorival said that the neighborhood home owner's association asked Zimmerman to organize its neighborhood watch.

Can we finally put to bed the "self appointed" nonsense?

 

[avoiding injuries]

Anyone have a per witness take on the trial today? I don't care who.. I'd be happy with Tim's take even..

I believe four witnesses. Sargeant who came to scene and tried to revive Trayvon - very credible.Neighborhood watch professional. stated that Z acted outside norms in following and not just calling police however, she said that it is natural to investigate situations about suspicious individuals/situations (i.e., a person walking in rain looking in windows, etc.)

President of homeowner association - older gent who seemed lost.

Police Forensics woman - so-so testimony.

Witness who heard fight moving left to right - she is being drilled by defense because the L to R was never mentioned in testimonial docs before.

What did the sarge say? Any sticking testimony there one way or the other?

Sarge was matter of fact and didnt really sway anything one way or the other. Neighborhood watch professional was a big help to the defense. Very complimentary of GZ and defended him well. A letter of recommendation/acknowledgement she wrote about him was ruled inadmissible.

President of HOA said that it was not policy to follow people, but it was procedure to keep an eye on people at a safe distance and be the eyes and ears of the police. This was the defenses words that the HOA guy agreed with. Someone can correct me if I worded that wrong, but it's close.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

this witness signed a petition to prosecute Zimmerman

This link is no longer an available page..

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

this witness signed a petition to prosecute Zimmerman

This link is no longer an available page..

it works for me

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

this witness signed a petition to prosecute Zimmerman

ZING!!!!

MOM called her out on it just now.

 

[Gawain]

Now they're hitting her with the change.org stuff. Can't imagine the testimony will be credited as reliable.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Andrew Branca, LOSD ‏@LawSelfDefense 2m

#Zimmerman Trial: Today was a total debacle for the State. http://bit.ly/14V1xtO

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

What about discussing testimony in the same room with another witness with State at the same time?

Selene just signed this petition on Change.org.

MOM got the point across that she was biased.

She said she "liked both sides equally"

MOM points out she only liked on Facebook the Justice for Trayvon Martin page

When he asks why she didn't like Z's Facebook page she says, "The opportunity did not present itself."

MOM points out she signed the petition, she claims she did not sign it, she just "liked" the page. Which unless there's a bug with the software is an outright lie.

 

[Lutherman2112]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

What about discussing testimony in the same room with another witness with State at the same time?

Totally new and novel. Never been done before.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

What about discussing testimony in the same room with another witness with State at the same time?

That's never good. Are you aware of whether the defense moved to exclude the witnesses testimony? Obviously the jury could choose to discredit the testimony, but it should arguably have been excluded in the first place. I wouldn't leave that decision to the jury.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is the petition, she most likely wrote something (like a paragraph) and then clicked to share it on Facebook:

http://www.change.org/petitions/prosecute-the-killer-of-our-son-17-year-old-trayvon-martin?utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition&utm_term=own_wall

If they really wanted to they could probably subpoena for what she wrote, present it, and that slam her with perjury.

 

[squistion]

If there has ever been a worse thread with 10k+ Posts on this board I can't really recall it.

Agreed. I'm really ashamed of my own role in it.

From now on I'm restricting myself to observations of what I glean from the trial. No more predictions, no more arguing racism or whether or not Zimmerman is guilty. My views are pretty well known on those subjects.

As are the views of CH, Jon_mx and JoJo, but I doubt that they will follow your lead.

Why don't you tell me what my views are other than Zimmermans story is plausible, and most of the Anti-Zimmerman folks, including yourself ignore the lack of evidence to convict, and the evidence that doesn't fit your fry Zimmerman agenda.. I've laid out a scenario that includes the facts of the case.. The arguments I oppose are the ones that are contradicted by the facts of the case.. I've never said he was innocent.. But I'm certainly not going to concede that he is guilty just because a few of you anti-zimmerman folks are either racially/emotionally biased/motivated.

My fry Zimmerman agenda? Like pointing out that there is not a single report that one juror laughed at that lame joke yesterday? You can't even accept what all media observers said about the jury's reaction - talk about an agenda.

My position has been and is that I am extremely skeptical of Zimmerman's story and think he should have gone to trial but I wasn't there, so I don't know if he is guilty or not - so contrary to what you think, that doesn't make me one of the anti-Zimmerman folk (apparently if one disagrees with your opinion that makes them a Zimmerman hater).

"If someone disagrees with your opinion" ? lol You were seeking/naming me, not the other way around.. You had a problem with my opinion.. Or at least what you thought was my opinion. (It's obvious you still don't know what my opinion is)

All I did originally was name people outside of Tim whose views are pretty well known on those subjects discussed in this thread (see Tim's OP). I was naming several of the most prolific opinionated posters on this topic. Since when does "views are well known" mean the same thing as not plausible?

Here are the Top 6 in this thread by post count, so don't dispute that your views are not well known:

Carolina Hustler 1901

Christo 1616

Timschochet 1264

BustedKnuckles 1235

jon_mx 825

Jojo Circus Boy 495

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

What about discussing testimony in the same room with another witness with State at the same time?

That's never good. Are you aware of whether the defense moved to exclude the witnesses testimony? Obviously the jury could choose to discredit the testimony, but it should arguably have been excluded in the first place. I wouldn't leave that decision to the jury.

When MOM pressed the witness, she said they did not discuss testimony, they just made sure they were comfortable.

MOM followed up with, "They spent 45 minutes making sure you were comfortable?"

Witness replied, "Yes."

 

[jamny]

MOM?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

MOM?

Mark O'Mara

 

[Gawain]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

For me it's the fact that she managed to remember something that she hadn't said in any depositions that creates the question about bias and the facebook/change.org postings work towards confirming this bias.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

What about discussing testimony in the same room with another witness with State at the same time?

That's never good. Are you aware of whether the defense moved to exclude the witnesses testimony? Obviously the jury could choose to discredit the testimony, but it should arguably have been excluded in the first place. I wouldn't leave that decision to the jury.

When MOM pressed the witness, she said they did not discuss testimony, they just made sure they were comfortable.

MOM followed up with, "They spent 45 minutes making sure you were comfortable?"

Witness replied, "Yes."

That doesn't seem particularly out of the ordinary. I spend at least that amount of time in witness prep making sure the witness knows how the process works (who will be asking questions, what happens when people object, explaining what the objections mean, assuaging any anxiety). I prefer to do it one on one, but it isn't unheard of to do it with another witness present.

Again, the jury is perfectly free to believe a contrary inference, but it doesn't strike me as a sign of a weak case. Every decent criminal defense attorney knows how to kick up these types of issues.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The petition stuff doesn't seem particularly damaging to me. You can impeach a witness with bias, but presumably a witness who possesses knowledge that implicates a defendant will think that the defendant committed a crime. Juries routinely convict guys based on the testimony of witnesses who have cut deals with the State.

For me it's the fact that she managed to remember something that she hadn't said in any depositions that creates the question about bias and the facebook/change.org postings work towards confirming this bias.

Yes, claims of bias are generally more compelling if the testimony is inconsistent with prior testimony.