Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[jamny]

MOM?

Mark O'Mara

Thx...I guess defense. I don't know the lawyers names yet

 

[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."

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.

Perhaps if she didn't answer this question, "Did BDLR let you listen to the recordings of the statements you previously made so that they would be fresh in your memory today?"Witness, "No, we went over transcripts of our statements."

 

[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.

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

Gotta say, I much prefer you to the other noted attorney poster in the thread. :rofl: reminds me too much of 1L contracts.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

MOM?

Mark O'Mara

Thx...I guess defense. I don't know the lawyers names yet

Yes Defense, West is also defense and made the infamous knock knock joke during opening statements which I believe originated with Jay Leno using during the O.J. Simpson trial.

 

[Christo]

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.

Gotta say, I much prefer you to the other noted attorney poster in the thread. :rofl: reminds me too much of 1L contracts.

 

[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.

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

Gotta say, I much prefer you to the other noted attorney poster in the thread. :rofl: reminds me too much of 1L contracts.

Flashbacks to Robert Summers. NOOOOOOOO!! If his neck could have turned like that that'd be the picture of him that'd form in my head.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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.

Unless you're hoping to persuade the jury to discredit the prosecution all together, sighting this and a few other things that may come up..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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.

And every attorney knows how to plant the statements you need from a witness.. Not saying that is what happened here, but it happens all the time..

 

[avoiding injuries]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

 

[avoiding injuries]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

It sucks they have to end every segment about this trial to note that GZ has a civil lawsuit against their network for defamation.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

Did they really report that?

 

[squistion]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

 

[pantherclub]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

if you scroll back through you will clearly see Hustler is illiterate. Dont take it personally, the little guy is trying so hard.

I don't think Zimmerman is a born and bread liar so I think it might be butter if he does take the stand unless he gets jam-ed up during crustexamination.

post 15228 as an example

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

What where you pointing out then when you said "I doubt they would follow your lead"

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

if you scroll back through you will clearly see Hustler is illiterate. Dont take it personally, the little guy is trying so hard.

I don't think Zimmerman is a born and bread liar so I think it might be butter if he does take the stand unless he gets jam-ed up during crustexamination.

post 15228 as an example

My literacy is Toast

 

[avoiding injuries]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

Did they really report that?

They did. What's concerning to me is that the general public who aren't following this case but watch the news, may be in for a surprise if the media reports on this trial with that kind of slant.

Even the HLN panel from this morning were commenting on the good job the defense was doing today. Bizarre.

 

[Charlie Frown]

Have the let Zimmy walk yet?

 

[Slapdash]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

Did they really report that?

I can't believe they wouldn't agree with Hannity forums.

 

[squistion]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

What where you pointing out then when you said "I doubt they would follow your lead"

Geez.

This is what Timmy said:

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.

Now read this again carefully, this was my unedited exact response:

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

Timmy was saying he was going to restrict himself to observations that he gleaned from trial because his views are well known. I would say that the views of the top six posters by post count which include Timmy, you, jonny boy and jo jo are all pretty well known - if not, then you have wasted hundreds of hours posting in this thread.

The "lead" I was referring to, that I hoped you and the others would follow, was Timmy's, and that you all might also restrict yourselves to observations of what you glean from the trial, not all these other things that Tim mentioned that consumed the thread pre trial.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

What where you pointing out then when you said "I doubt they would follow your lead"

Geez.

This is what Timmy said:

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.

Now read this again carefully, this was my unedited exact response:

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

Timmy was saying he was going to restrict himself to observations that he gleaned from trial because his views are well known. I would say that the views of the top six posters by post count which include Timmy, you, jonny boy and jo jo are also pretty well known - if not, then you have wasted hundreds of hours posting in this thread.

The "lead" I was referring to, that I hoped you and the others would follow was Timmy's, and that you all might also restrict yourselves to observations of what you glean from the trial, not all these other things that Tim mentioned that consumed the thread pre trial.

I'm not going to follow his lead and stop posting predictions, racism, and arguing that Zimmerman is guilty or not guilty when I never did any of those things.. Your post makes no sense..

Most, if not all of my posts have been about 1 of 2 things

- Arguing against false claims and supposition presented as facts

- Presenting supposition of my own about what may have happened..

I've never argued that this case was based on race, I've never said Zimmerman was Guilty or Innocent, and I never made any predictions..

 

[squistion]

You post makes no sense..

Coming from you, based on your recent responses to me, that is a compliment.

Thanks!

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

What where you pointing out then when you said "I doubt they would follow your lead"

Geez.

This is what Timmy said:

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.

Now read this again carefully, this was my unedited exact response:

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

Timmy was saying he was going to restrict himself to observations that he gleaned from trial because his views are well known. I would say that the views of the top six posters by post count which include Timmy, you, jonny boy and jo jo are all pretty well known - if not, then you have wasted hundreds of hours posting in this thread.

The "lead" I was referring to, that I hoped you and the others would follow, was Timmy's, and that you all might also restrict yourselves to observations of what you glean from the trial, not all these other things that Tim mentioned that consumed the thread pre trial.

I've been reacting to everything as introduced since the trial started. The fact that you singled out 3 zimmy supporters and then point to the top 6 posters (really?!), speaks volumes of where your allegiance lies and to argue to the contrary is just asinine.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Your post makes no sense..

Coming from you, based on your recent responses to me, that is a compliment.

Thanks!

You're welcome!

 

[Lutherman2112]

MOM?

They're usin' code names,

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

Did they really report that?

I can't believe they wouldn't agree with Hannity forums.

You might want to watch today's proceedings before you agree w/ NBC's synopsis.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

What where you pointing out then when you said "I doubt they would follow your lead"

Geez.

This is what Timmy said:

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.

Now read this again carefully, this was my unedited exact response:

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

Timmy was saying he was going to restrict himself to observations that he gleaned from trial because his views are well known. I would say that the views of the top six posters by post count which include Timmy, you, jonny boy and jo jo are all pretty well known - if not, then you have wasted hundreds of hours posting in this thread.

The "lead" I was referring to, that I hoped you and the others would follow, was Timmy's, and that you all might also restrict yourselves to observations of what you glean from the trial, not all these other things that Tim mentioned that consumed the thread pre trial.

I've been reacting to everything as introduced since the trial started. The fact that you singled out 3 zimmy supporters and then point to the top 6 posters (really?!), speaks volumes of where your allegiance lies and to argue to the contrary is just asinine.

I wouldn't call myself a "Zimmy supporter". The guy is actually the kind of person I avoid in RL. Seems like the kind of guy who would be the class snitch and/or be up the bosses a$$. I don't like getting the police involved in anything unless I absolutely have to and he does it constantly.. I understand why others may dislike him as a person.. I'm just trying to look at it objectively, because I'm also a civil liberties guy, and I think the burden on the state should be absolutely Iron clad. The idea that he might go to prison is fine with me, but if they fail to prove their case and he goes anyways, I won't like it..

I'd call myself an anti-jump to conclusions, anti-Zimmerman lynch mob guy.. Which in turn labels me as a Zimmerman Supporter by the lynch mob folks and anyone looking for allies on the Zimmerman team..

 

[squistion]

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?

And then insinuated that we weren't likely to weigh the evidence of the case as it unfolds and potentially change our opinions.. Tell me what my view is then.. I don't think you know what my view is..

What the hell are you talking about? I never insinuated that. I never said anything even remotely close to that. I never insinuated anything about you or anyone not being likely to weigh the evidence or change your opinion as it unfolds. That is a complete fiction.

What where you pointing out then when you said "I doubt they would follow your lead"

Geez.

This is what Timmy said:

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.

Now read this again carefully, this was my unedited exact response:

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

Timmy was saying he was going to restrict himself to observations that he gleaned from trial because his views are well known. I would say that the views of the top six posters by post count which include Timmy, you, jonny boy and jo jo are all pretty well known - if not, then you have wasted hundreds of hours posting in this thread.

The "lead" I was referring to, that I hoped you and the others would follow, was Timmy's, and that you all might also restrict yourselves to observations of what you glean from the trial, not all these other things that Tim mentioned that consumed the thread pre trial.

I've been reacting to everything as introduced since the trial started. The fact that you singled out 3 zimmy supporters and then point to the top 6 posters (really?!), speaks volumes of where your allegiance lies and to argue to the contrary is just asinine.

Yeah, right.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is why originally labeled us as "not pro-Martin" which seemed more appropriate.

 

[greenroom]

This is why originally labeled us as "not pro-Martin" which seemed more appropriate.

Please you are the President of the Zimmerman fan club. It would not shock me if you had a picture of him above your bed.

You have no middle ground and refuse to even see anything positive for Martin.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

This is why originally labeled us as "not pro-Martin" which seemed more appropriate.

You are "#1Zimmermanfan" over at the Hannity forums.

 

[jon_mx]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

I'll bet anyone that Zimmerman is not convicted.....anyone?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is why originally labeled us as "not pro-Martin" which seemed more appropriate.

Please you are the President of the Zimmerman fan club. It would not shock me if you had a picture of him above your bed.

You have no middle ground and refuse to even see anything positive for Martin.

Lookup my first post when trial started yesterday.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

...If they continue to drive the point home that Zimmerman was cool/calm/collected, the prosecution could give them a left jab with ...

... he made his decision that Martin was no good. Even his lawyers didn't think Martin's life was worthy keeping these proceedings solemn. So we have Zimmerman who sees trouble in kids playing, who has trained in self defense and martial arts, who has id'd a " punk". He is going to let this one get away! So he follows him. He encounters him face to face and so does this cool calm collected peace officer wannabe diffuse the situation? No. A scuffle starts and when Martin seems to get the upper hand and has a chance to get away Zimmerman calmly, coolly, and collectedly pulls his gun and makes certain that this " punk" doesn't get away. [in the process the recoil from firing the gun breaks his nose and busts his head against the concrete. ]

Guys, this is not my take on anything. It is just one way given only a few seconds of thought that being "cool, calm, and collected" could be spun against Zimmerman. This is not meant to be a prediction of what will come nor an argument meant to convince any readers in this thread.

 

[avoiding injuries]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

I'll bet anyone that Zimmerman is not convicted.....anyone?

In the Obama/Romney thread as well as the Tiger thread, as soon as an offer offer was made to place a bet, everyone who argued the opposite point was shamed if they didn't bet. We'll see what happens here.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

...If they continue to drive the point home that Zimmerman was cool/calm/collected, the prosecution could give them a left jab with ...

... he made his decision that Martin was no good. Even his lawyers didn't think Martin's life was worthy keeping these proceedings solemn. So we have Zimmerman who sees trouble in kids playing, who has trained in self defense and martial arts, who has id'd a " punk". He is going to let this one get away! So he follows him. He encounters him face to face and so does this cool calm collected peace officer wannabe diffuse the situation? No. A scuffle starts and when Martin seems to get the upper hand and has a chance to get away Zimmerman calmly, coolly, and collectedly pulls his gun and makes certain that this " punk" doesn't get away. [in the process the recoil from firing the gun breaks his nose and busts his head against the concrete. ]Guys, this is not my take on anything. It is just one way given only a few seconds of thought that being "cool, calm, and collected" could be spun against Zimmerman. This is not meant to be a prediction of what will come nor an argument meant to convince any readers in this thread.

Amen. And amen. And amen. You have to forgive me. I'm not familiar with the local custom. Where I come from, you always say "Amen" after you hear a prayer. Because that's what you just heard - a prayer. Where I come from, that particular prayer is called "The Prayer for the Dead." You just heard The Prayer for the Dead, my fellow stockholders, and you didn't say, "Amen." This company is dead. I didn't kill it. Don't blame me. It was dead when I got here. It's too late for prayers. For even if the prayers were answered, and a miracle occurred, and the yen did this, and the dollar did that, and the infrastructure did the other thing, we would still be dead. You know why? Fiber optics. New technologies. Obsolescence. We're dead alright. We're just not broke. And you know the surest way to go broke? Keep getting an increasing share of a shrinking market. Down the tubes. Slow but sure. You know, at one time there must've been dozens of companies making buggy whips. And I'll bet the last company around was the one that made the best ####### buggy whip you ever saw. Now how would you have liked to have been a stockholder in that company? You invested in a business and this business is dead. Let's have the intelligence, let's have the decency to sign the death certificate, collect the insurance, and invest in something with a future. "Ah, but we can't," goes the prayer. "We can't because we have responsibility, a responsibility to our employees, to our community. What will happen to them?" I got two words for that: Who cares? Care about them? Why? They didn't care about you. They sucked you dry. You have no responsibility to them. For the last ten years this company bled your money. Did this community ever say, "We know times are tough. We'll lower taxes, reduce water and sewer." Check it out: You're paying twice what you did ten years ago. And our devoted employees, who have taken no increases for the past three years, are still making twice what they made ten years ago; and our stock - one-sixth what it was ten years ago. Who cares? I'll tell you. Me. I'm not your best friend. I'm your only friend. I don't make anything? I'm making you money. And lest we forget, that's the only reason any of you became stockholders in the first place. You want to make money! You don't care if they manufacture wire and cable, fried chicken, or grow tangerines! You want to make money! I'm the only friend you've got. I'm making you money. Take the money. Invest it somewhere else. Maybe, maybe you'll get lucky and it'll be used productively. And if it is, you'll create new jobs and provide a service for the economy and, God forbid, even make a few bucks for yourselves. And if anybody asks, tell 'em ya gave at the plant. And by the way, it pleases me that I am called "Larry the Liquidator." You know why, fellow stockholders? Because at my funeral, you'll leave with a smile on your face and a few bucks in your pocket. Now that's a funeral worth having!

 

[squistion]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

I'll bet anyone that Zimmerman is not convicted.....anyone?

In the Obama/Romney thread as well as the Tiger thread, as soon as an offer offer was made to place a bet, everyone who argued the opposite point was shamed if they didn't bet. We'll see what happens here.

I'll wait to hear what Nate Silver says...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

NBC nightly news just did a piece on today's action. I guess I was mistaken in what I saw. They said it was a very good day for the prosecution and the defense will have a tough time recuperating from today's testimonies.

I'll bet anyone that Zimmerman is not convicted.....anyone?

In the Obama/Romney thread as well as the Tiger thread, as soon as an offer offer was made to place a bet, everyone who argued the opposite point was shamed if they didn't bet. We'll see what happens here.

No one that said he would be convicted previously in this thread is going to reply to that.. Just pretend like they didn't see it.. And/or pretend they never said what they said..

 

[BustedKnuckles]

JO JO the clowns posts have become completely un-readable...ugh

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

JO JO the clowns posts have become completely un-readable...ugh

Why do you hate Danny DeVito?

 

[Widbil83]

Should be fun watching this mess take the stand

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/twitter/rachel-jeantel-758403

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Should be fun watching this mess take the stand

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/twitter/rachel-jeantel-758403

offdee scale?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Should be fun watching this mess take the stand

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/twitter/rachel-jeantel-758403

That should be entertaining

 

[pittstownkiller]

Should be fun watching this mess take the standhttp://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/twitter/rachel-jeantel-758403

offdee scale?

Well she is my type but the mouth looks like it belongs on a muppet and the court nails look painful attached to those mitts.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Should be fun watching this mess take the standhttp://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/twitter/rachel-jeantel-758403

offdee scale?

Well she is my type but the mouth looks like it belongs on a muppet and the court nails look painful attached to those mitts.

lol I can't wait.. I don't care what she says, anything will be entertainment..

 

[Gawain]

Should be fun watching this mess take the stand

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/twitter/rachel-jeantel-758403

offdee scale?

5-Hottest chick on the prosecution's witness list, but not the hottest in the courtroom and unacknowledged next to the foxier court reporters.

 

[timschochet]

In all seriousness, if it turns out that Geragos and others are correct and Zimmerman does not testify (this remains to be seen) then the girlfriend's testimony will be the most dramatic in this entire trial. How she holds up under cross-examination will be pretty fascinating to watch.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

In all seriousness, if it turns out that Geragos and others are correct and Zimmerman does not testify (this remains to be seen) then the girlfriend's testimony will be the most dramatic in this entire trial. How she holds up under cross-examination will be pretty fascinating to watch.

Over / Under % of questions she answers under cross-examination = "I don't remember"

50%

 

[timschochet]

In all seriousness, if it turns out that Geragos and others are correct and Zimmerman does not testify (this remains to be seen) then the girlfriend's testimony will be the most dramatic in this entire trial. How she holds up under cross-examination will be pretty fascinating to watch.

Over / Under % of questions she answers under cross-examination = "I don't remember"50%

If she answers that to a single important question then the prosecution did not do its job.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

When is the gf scheduled to testify?

I feel bad for her. She's obviously not the most intelligent or sophisticated person, but she still lost somebody, has been put through a lot, and it doesn't change the facts of the case or what she heard.