What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

One thing that may hurt the ex-teacher's testimony is that she only heard the yell for help once whereas the 911 tape shows there were multiple cries for help.

Unless I misunderstood her statement and she was referring to two different types of sounds - the help sound (where she could have heard it multiple times) and another sound.

 
Not sure why you don't think it is important as it may raise significant doubts among the jurors as to Z's veracity.
It's less important to me than if Zimmerman had remembered a more important detail incorrectly...

The position of the hands comes after the shooting and has very little to do if anything with how things unfolded and why the shooting took place..
Its very important as Z was specific in that he demonstrated the motion of moving the arms apart. This was along with Z saying he wasn't sure that Trayvon was shot and therefore he needed to ensure Trayvon was restrained. He also indicated he thought he had something in his hand. Both of those bolster his "I did it in defence" claim. Debunking the arm position not only puts Z's stance in question but also raises questions as to his honestly.

 
This has bothered me since this all happened...its may not seem that important on the surface but it tells us that Zimm`s account of what happened cant be trusted .

The first day of opening statements and formal testimony in the second-degree murder trial of George Zimmerman, the killer of Trayvon Martin, covered a lot of ground in eight hours on Monday. But the prosecution zeroed in on something that has fascinated me for one day shy of a year: Trayvon’s hands. In his powerful opening statement outlining the “tangled web of lies” in the case against Zimmerman, Florida Assistant State Attorney John Guy told the jury, “He said that after he shot Trayvon Martin, he got on top of Trayvon Martin. On his back. And he took his arms and he spread them out. That didn’t happen.”

Zimmerman told Sanford police officers that tidbit about Trayvon’s arms twice. The first time was when he was interviewed by detectives the night of the shooting. The second time was during a reenactment of the events the day after the killing, which I detailed last year.

Guy’s confidence in saying “that didn’t happen” about Zimmerman moving Trayvon’s arms rests on two pieces of evidence. One we’ve all known about. Another we didn’t — or at least I didn’t.

“I don’t know if I pushed him off me [or] he fell off me, either way I got on top of him and I pushed his arms apart,” Zimmerman said as he demonstrated how he spread Trayvon’s arms away from his body. He told the officer that he didn’t remember how he got on top of his victim and continued with his version of events. “But I got on his back and moved his arms apart because when he was repeatedly hitting me in the face and the head,” Zimmerman said, “I thought he had something in his hands. So, I moved his hands apart.” Trayvon, he said, was face down. Again, he says the neighbor with the flashlight came out, he asked that person to help him restrain Trayvon. The police arrived perhaps less than a minute later and he stood up, holstered his weapon and put his hands up.


“The first two officers to Trayvon Martin’s body found him exactly like the defendant left him — face down, his hands clutching his chest,” Guy told the jury. This is the evidence we’ve known from almost the very beginning. Sanford Police Officer Ricardo Ayala wrote in his report of the scene that he “noticed that there was, what appeared to be a black male…laying face down on the ground. The black male had his hands underneath his body.”

Yesterday, Guy revealed that a neighbor took a cellphone photo of Trayvon’s body before the police arrived that rainy Feb. 26, 2012, night. Trayvon’s arms were underneath his body, Guy told the court.
There was a photo posted of Martin that actually does correspond to Zimmermans story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2348155/George-Zimmerman-trial-Trayvon-Martins-parents-walk-jurys-shown-graphic-photos-sons-body.html

Scroll down to the middle of the article. Martin is on his back with his arms spread out.
So ur saying that the cops was lying and the pic on the cell phone is fake? Dont you think this pic was taken after the EMT`s tried to revive trey? seeing the rubber gloves indicates thats what this pic is about
Keep scrolling BK. It's the picture further down.
you mean this one ????

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/25/article-2348155-1A814869000005DC-436_634x475.jpg

thats exactly what i was saying
I apologize then as I'm not sure what you are saying. Zimmerman said he got on top of Martin on his back (meaning he got on top of Martin's back) and moved his arms to the side. That picture shows exactly that.

Not sure what Guy is referring to but this picture corresponds to Zimmermans statement (and since there was another person there that assisted - I'm sure they'll be called to verify).
Im saying zimm lied about what he did after he shot trey....and the pic of trey face down proves that...a cop on the scene corresponds that also
Cop on the scene said he was grasping his heart.. which contradicts the picture.. Their all liars.. Guess we'll have to throw out all of their testimonies.. Wait, only one of those 3 sources are being used in court..

 
Your mind is a tricky thing. Sometimes it inserts information into a story. It is common that multiple people witnessing the same event will tell completely different versions of events. They are not lying, it is just the way our minds work. I guess the lady who heard three gun shots is a liar?

 
this witness (wife of flash light guy) is the best the state has had so far, I don't think the last witness will be taken seriously by the jury

Defense hasn't had much opportunity to "trip" her up

 
Last edited by a moderator:
this witness (wife of flash light guy) is the best the state has had so far, I don't think the last witness will be taken seriously by the jury

Defense hasn't had much opportunity to "trip" her up
Did she say Zimmerman was on top before the shot? I know she said Zimmerman was on top after the shot..
Yes after seeing them on TV, he is getting to that now.

 
Haven't been able to watch this morning, but Fox News reported that the judge ruled that Zimmerman's 911 calls in the past could be offered into evidence. Fox speculates this is a big win for the prosecution, as several of those calls suggest racial profiling...

 
MOM on the scent now.

Witness admitted she only used 1 picture of Martin in a hoodie, a head shot, not a full body shot.

So she had no reference as to how tall and big Martin might have been.

 
I've seen this question asked before, but I don't know if it's been answered:

Is there a DEFINITIVE way, using forensics, to prove what direction a bullet is fired? (Whether up, down, straight ahead, etc.?) If so, that would settle this question of who was on top, wouldn't it?

 
MOM on the scent now.

Witness admitted she only used 1 picture of Martin in a hoodie, a head shot, not a full body shot.

So she had no reference as to how tall and big Martin might have been.
11:54 a.m. ET: O'Mara has asked Mamalo to describe a photo she saw of Martin that she used as a comparison to Zimmerman's size. Mamalo said the photo of Martin was one of the first ones they used in thenews.

Since she based this on the photo of the younger Martin, that won't be good for the prosecution. Not sure how the prosecution doesn't account for this leading up to this.

 
I've seen this question asked before, but I don't know if it's been answered:

Is there a DEFINITIVE way, using forensics, to prove what direction a bullet is fired? (Whether up, down, straight ahead, etc.?) If so, that would settle this question of who was on top, wouldn't it?
I think the answer to that was no.

 
MOM on the scent now.

Witness admitted she only used 1 picture of Martin in a hoodie, a head shot, not a full body shot.

So she had no reference as to how tall and big Martin might have been.
11:54 a.m. ET: O'Mara has asked Mamalo to describe a photo she saw of Martin that she used as a comparison to Zimmerman's size. Mamalo said the photo of Martin was one of the first ones they used in thenews.

Since she based this on the photo of the younger Martin, that won't be good for the prosecution. Not sure how the prosecution doesn't account for this leading up to this.
Now she is using the picture of martin in the football uniform, this one I believe.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've seen this question asked before, but I don't know if it's been answered:

Is there a DEFINITIVE way, using forensics, to prove what direction a bullet is fired? (Whether up, down, straight ahead, etc.?) If so, that would settle this question of who was on top, wouldn't it?
I asked that this thread be merged with the Dexter thread earlier. I'm sure we'd have the answer to this question by now.

Kidding aside, I would expect that there should be a way for them to determine it.

 
I've seen this question asked before, but I don't know if it's been answered:

Is there a DEFINITIVE way, using forensics, to prove what direction a bullet is fired? (Whether up, down, straight ahead, etc.?) If so, that would settle this question of who was on top, wouldn't it?
I asked that this thread be merged with the Dexter thread earlier. I'm sure we'd have the answer to this question by now.Kidding aside, I would expect that there should be a way for them to determine it.
BLOOD SPLATTER!

 
MOM on the scent now.

Witness admitted she only used 1 picture of Martin in a hoodie, a head shot, not a full body shot.

So she had no reference as to how tall and big Martin might have been.
11:54 a.m. ET: O'Mara has asked Mamalo to describe a photo she saw of Martin that she used as a comparison to Zimmerman's size. Mamalo said the photo of Martin was one of the first ones they used in thenews.

Since she based this on the photo of the younger Martin, that won't be good for the prosecution. Not sure how the prosecution doesn't account for this leading up to this.
Now she is using the picture of martin in the football uniform, this one I believe.
He was referring to the Hollister pic.

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AkWojyc.WmpSNG_WPc51mE2bvZx4?p=trayvon+martin+images&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-900

eta: at the end he was describing the Hollister pic. Not sure the pic she saw the first time though. maybe you're right.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, I watched this witness, and watched the defense try to break her down. My personal impression was that they were unable to seriously damage her credibility. But who knows if the jury agrees with me?

 
I've seen this question asked before, but I don't know if it's been answered:

Is there a DEFINITIVE way, using forensics, to prove what direction a bullet is fired? (Whether up, down, straight ahead, etc.?) If so, that would settle this question of who was on top, wouldn't it?
Most guns fire bullets straight ahead, so I will go with that.

 
I've seen this question asked before, but I don't know if it's been answered:

Is there a DEFINITIVE way, using forensics, to prove what direction a bullet is fired? (Whether up, down, straight ahead, etc.?) If so, that would settle this question of who was on top, wouldn't it?
Most guns fire bullets straight ahead, so I will go with that.
If they found the lead, that could help.. Like if it was found on the roof after it passed through trayvon.. etc

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, I watched this witness, and watched the defense try to break her down. My personal impression was that they were unable to seriously damage her credibility. But who knows if the jury agrees with me?
She admitted she may be wrong and then said, "I don't know who's bigger now" Going to be difficult to put much weight behind her statement now. I thought the defense was sunk when he asked why she didn't say who was larger when she was originally questioned and she said, "They never asked me", but followed by her subsequent uncertainty and I doubt this witness gets much air play.

 
The prosecution not allowing her to see up to date pictures of Trayvon's height for a better comparison is pretty messed up.. If they wanted her honest opinion, they'd allow her to see recent pictures of Trayvon's size..

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The prosecution not allowing her to see up to date pictures of Trayvon's height for a better comparison is pretty messed up.. If they wanted her honest opinion, they'd allow her to see recent pictures of Trayvon's size..
The judge is seriously biased, it's disgusting.

At any point when State said "Objection: questioned and answered", she would sustain

If Defense made similar objections they were mostly overruled.

 
The prosecution not allowing her to see up to date pictures of Trayvon's height for a better comparison is pretty messed up.. If they wanted her honest opinion, they'd allow her to see recent pictures of Trayvon's size..
The judge is seriously biased, it's disgusting.

At any point when State said "Objection: questioned and answered", she would sustain

If Defense made similar objections they were mostly overruled.
:lol:

 
The prosecution not allowing her to see up to date pictures of Trayvon's height for a better comparison is pretty messed up.. If they wanted her honest opinion, they'd allow her to see recent pictures of Trayvon's size..
The judge is seriously biased, it's disgusting.

At any point when State said "Objection: questioned and answered", she would sustain

If Defense made similar objections they were mostly overruled.
:lol:
Not following every word in the trial, but was just reading the HLN blog and this was the latest entry:

2:26 p.m. ET: O'Mara tries asking Rumph if she hears anything of concern in Zimmerman's voice. The prosecution objects and the judge tells O'Mara he could call Rumph as his own witness.

If the prosecution called this witness (who was handles the 911 calls I believe), why couldn't the defense cross? Not sure why the prosecution objected to this and specifically not sure about the judges comment.

 
Isn't this the girl who tweeted that she went to Miami University? How the heck is she back in high school now. If I have a kid that's going to be 20 in high school, get me that vasectomy now.

 
The prosecution not allowing her to see up to date pictures of Trayvon's height for a better comparison is pretty messed up.. If they wanted her honest opinion, they'd allow her to see recent pictures of Trayvon's size..
The judge is seriously biased, it's disgusting.

At any point when State said "Objection: questioned and answered", she would sustain

If Defense made similar objections they were mostly overruled.
:lol:
Not following every word in the trial, but was just reading the HLN blog and this was the latest entry:

2:26 p.m. ET: O'Mara tries asking Rumph if she hears anything of concern in Zimmerman's voice. The prosecution objects and the judge tells O'Mara he could call Rumph as his own witness.

If the prosecution called this witness (who was handles the 911 calls I believe), why couldn't the defense cross? Not sure why the prosecution objected to this and specifically not sure about the judges comment.
Unless the parties agree, a cross-examination has to be within the scope of the testimony elicited on direct examination. One of the reasons to not agree to this is that during cross-examination the lawyer is allowed to ask leading questions. On direct, he can't.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The prosecution not allowing her to see up to date pictures of Trayvon's height for a better comparison is pretty messed up.. If they wanted her honest opinion, they'd allow her to see recent pictures of Trayvon's size..
The judge is seriously biased, it's disgusting.

At any point when State said "Objection: questioned and answered", she would sustain

If Defense made similar objections they were mostly overruled.
:lol:
Not following every word in the trial, but was just reading the HLN blog and this was the latest entry:

2:26 p.m. ET: O'Mara tries asking Rumph if she hears anything of concern in Zimmerman's voice. The prosecution objects and the judge tells O'Mara he could call Rumph as his own witness.

If the prosecution called this witness (who was handles the 911 calls I believe), why couldn't the defense cross? Not sure why the prosecution objected to this and specifically not sure about the judges comment.
Unless the parties agree, a cross-examination has to be within the scope of the testimony elicited on direct examination.
Thanks for the clarification.

 
She says that Martin said, Why are you following me? and than heard a heavy breathing voice say, What are you doing around here?

Than she says she hears the sound of wet grass and hears Martin say Get off me, Get off me.

 
Wierd explanation going on here. Said that Trayvon said "he's right behind me" and then she says she went to the bathroom to fix her hair. Amazing.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top