Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Where is the defense going with this?

Hoping to catch her in more lies and inconsistencies I guess.

She's taken her best shot at Zimmerman at this point. Keeping her on the stand as long as they can does not hurt Zimmerman it can only hurt her or the prosecution. If it goes nowhere, no skin off their nose.

Yea, but giving her a chance to cry again and say how hard it is to live with the burden of being the last person to talk to him and not wanting to see the body is pretty powerful I think.

 

[CurlyNight]

She's in the closet? This is getting funny!

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Where is the defense going with this?

Hoping to catch her in more lies and inconsistencies I guess.

She's taken her best shot at Zimmerman at this point. Keeping her on the stand as long as they can does not hurt Zimmerman it can only hurt her or the prosecution. If it goes nowhere, no skin off their nose.

Agreed, she has one of the stronger statements on record for the State, the more time they keep her up there the more likely she will be discredited.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Where is the defense going with this?

Hoping to catch her in more lies and inconsistencies I guess.

She's taken her best shot at Zimmerman at this point. Keeping her on the stand as long as they can does not hurt Zimmerman it can only hurt her or the prosecution. If it goes nowhere, no skin off their nose.

Yea, but giving her a chance to cry again and say how hard it is to live with the burden of being the last person to talk to him and not wanting to see the body is pretty powerful I think.

Yeah, the defense had to be pretty disappointed with that. Definitely didn't help them.

 

[GDogg]

What I found interesting earlier was that she said he didn't want to run because he was right next to his father's residence. Yet the fight occured a couple hundred feet from the residence. Doesn't add up.

That's only sixty to seventy yards. If I'm on the phone and my wife asks me where I am because she wants me home and I'm a couple hundred feet away, I'd probably tell her I'm right there (or right next to it or right by it) and I'll be in the house in 1 minute.

True. I thought it was a couple hundred feet but its actually only 60-70 yards. My bad.

Could 60-70 yards or a couple hundred feet not be "right next to [a] residence" to some people (such as myself)? What is the definition of "right next to [a] residence" as you understand it?

 

[avoiding injuries]

People smarter than me (that's most of you): What does impeaching a witness do?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

People smarter than me (that's most of you): What does impeaching a witness do?

Going after the credibility or highlighting inconsistencies of a witness is called impeachment.

 

[avoiding injuries]

People smarter than me (that's most of you): What does impeaching a witness do?

Nevermind.

http://www.crossexam.com/impeaching-an-expert-witness.html

 

[GDogg]

What I found interesting earlier was that she said he didn't want to run because he was right next to his father's residence. Yet the fight occured a couple hundred feet from the residence. Doesn't add up.

That's only sixty to seventy yards. If I'm on the phone and my wife asks me where I am because she wants me home and I'm a couple hundred feet away, I'd probably tell her I'm right there (or right next to it or right by it) and I'll be in the house in 1 minute.

True. I thought it was a couple hundred feet but its actually only 60-70 yards. My bad.

When my running back is tackled at his own 30, I always lament the fact that he was right there, but couldn't score.

Have you been on a football field? Have you stood at your 30 yard line and looked at the opposing goal line? That's not exactly far. It's 2-3 houses away.

 

[kentric]

What I found interesting earlier was that she said he didn't want to run because he was right next to his father's residence. Yet the fight occured a couple hundred feet from the residence. Doesn't add up.

That's only sixty to seventy yards. If I'm on the phone and my wife asks me where I am because she wants me home and I'm a couple hundred feet away, I'd probably tell her I'm right there (or right next to it or right by it) and I'll be in the house in 1 minute.

True. I thought it was a couple hundred feet but its actually only 60-70 yards. My bad.

Could 60-70 yards or a couple hundred feet not be "right next to [a] residence" to some people (such as myself)? What is the definition of "right next to [a] residence" as you understand it?

My point was that based on Didi's description of the phone conversation and also Z's call to non-emergency 911, there were several minutes of lapsed time between the time where he entered the complex and the time where he said he was near his father's house and the relative difference in distance between the entrance to the complex and the father's house would suggest that when he says he was near his father's house that he really was "near" his father's house. Now, am I clear (as mud)? haha

 

[kentric]

What I found interesting earlier was that she said he didn't want to run because he was right next to his father's residence. Yet the fight occured a couple hundred feet from the residence. Doesn't add up.

That's only sixty to seventy yards. If I'm on the phone and my wife asks me where I am because she wants me home and I'm a couple hundred feet away, I'd probably tell her I'm right there (or right next to it or right by it) and I'll be in the house in 1 minute.

True. I thought it was a couple hundred feet but its actually only 60-70 yards. My bad.

When my running back is tackled at his own 30, I always lament the fact that he was right there, but couldn't score.

Have you been on a football field? Have you stood at your 30 yard line and looked at the opposing goal line? That's not exactly far. It's 2-3 houses away.

Exactly

 

[jon_mx]

I am pretty sure impeaching has something to do with semen stains on a dress

 

[pantherclub]

I am pretty sure impeaching has something to do with semen stains on a dress

#bestpresidentever

 

[Slapdash]

Filibuster

 

[CurlyNight]

Thinking Don West will retire after this one...........

 

[Witz]

She's starting to go down in flames here - did you see the look she made to him behind his back?

 

[CurlyNight]

She's starting to go down in flames here - did you see the look she made to him behind his back?

You mean she doesn't need glasses??

 

[Gawain]

I would pay money for a reality show featuring DiDi having to take on mundane tasks.

Episode 1: DiD applies for a mortgage.

Episode 2: DiDi tries to figure out compound interest.

Episode 3: DiDi asks the banker if he's listenin'

 

[CurlyNight]

She's leaving today! lol! She doesn't want to come back tomorrow. Judge putting her in her place. ouch.

 

[Christo]

A couple more hours.

What?!?!/

 

[CurlyNight]

What?! Couple more hours needed to finish cross says defense.,. lol. Court recessed.

 

[Christo]

He did hurt her in the last 5 minutes.

 

[CurlyNight]

Think the defense did well? She says it was TM saying help but in earlier testimony documented they read back to her it could be him, he can get high pitched sometimes or something like that.

 

[Witz]

Live mike now with cbs and folks are talking about witness...

Don't think they know.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Her statement was weird. I get the slang, but she ended it with "You know it not" when talking about whether the screaming was TM.

 

[Gawain]

I'm sure that West also gave her his best shot right before breaking with the hope that she'll do something extraordinarily dumb, such as post on facebook about the trial.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

"I heard a pop pop pop"

its called an echo...echo ...echo

 

[BustedKnuckles]

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..

you cant see his left arm in that pic...but it doesnt matter...hes not even close to the position zimm states 2 different times ....he made very sure to spread his arms way out to the sides

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

"I heard a pop pop pop"

its called an echo...echo ...echo

what do you call not seeing the muzzle flash at time of shot, temporary blindness?

 

[jon_mx]

A couple more hours.

What?!?!/

I think he is ####### with her. She is going to go nuts thinking all night she has two more hours of this.

 

[avoiding injuries]

A couple more hours.

What?!?!/

I think he is ####### with her. She is going to go nuts thinking all night she has two more hours of this.

I thought he just said that to assure the court broke for the day.

 

[Nikki2200]

I can't understand one word. Nothing. It's like I turned on a foreign language channel or something.

 

[timschochet]

I can't understand one word. Nothing. It's like I turned on a foreign language channel or something.

Don't you watch The First 48?

 

[timschochet]

So unfortunately I didn't see the last 15 minutes of her testimony (I'm going to try and watch it now.) In your guys opinion, did the defense shake her credibility enough so that Zimmerman's testimony won't be necessary? Or do you think the jury is going to buy into the "get off me, get off me" ?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Sure she is biased, not sure why this stuff makes her uncredible.

She admitted on the stand that she has lied under oath several times..

 

[avoiding injuries]

So unfortunately I didn't see the last 15 minutes of her testimony (I'm going to try and watch it now.) In your guys opinion, did the defense shake her credibility enough so that Zimmerman's testimony won't be necessary? Or do you think the jury is going to buy into the "get off me, get off me" ?

I can't speak for the jurors, obviously, but I don't know how anyone takes this witness and what she says seriously. It seems like she had a story she tried sticking to and when the questions made her deviate from that story, she was lost and angered. Add in that statements that she originally made to Crump contradicts what she said in court today, and it doesn't look good. Who knows. The defense has overnight to think of questions to press her with tomorrow and the prosecution have overnight to try and settle her down and coach her. I think the defense has an easier job tonight.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Why am I the only person who thinks sitting under cover for 30-40 minutes in the rain while your on the phone and have nothing to do but go back and be with your family isn't a stretch? He only cared about getting home to watch the all-star game.

Who said you were the only person?

 

[Christo]

A couple more hours.

What?!?!/

I think he is ####### with her. She is going to go nuts thinking all night she has two more hours of this.

I thought he just said that to assure the court broke for the day.

When a lawyer says he needs 5 minutes he'll take 10. He said a couple of hours. He's not done with her yet. It wouldn't surprise me if he takes all morning with her.

 

[Gawain]

So unfortunately I didn't see the last 15 minutes of her testimony (I'm going to try and watch it now.) In your guys opinion, did the defense shake her credibility enough so that Zimmerman's testimony won't be necessary? Or do you think the jury is going to buy into the "get off me, get off me" ?

I can't speak for the jurors, obviously, but I don't know how anyone takes this witness and what she says seriously. It seems like she had a story she tried sticking to and when the questions made her deviate from that story, she was lost and angered. Add in that statements that she originally made to Crump contradicts what she said in court today, and it doesn't look good.Who knows. The defense has overnight to think of questions to press her with tomorrow and the prosecution have overnight to try and settle her down and coach her. I think the defense has an easier job tonight.

I'm fairly sure the prosecution has the easier job because they can't meet with her about anything to do with the trial. She's still technically under oath, so any meetings would not be proper.

 

[Christo]

So unfortunately I didn't see the last 15 minutes of her testimony (I'm going to try and watch it now.) In your guys opinion, did the defense shake her credibility enough so that Zimmerman's testimony won't be necessary? Or do you think the jury is going to buy into the "get off me, get off me" ?

I can't speak for the jurors, obviously, but I don't know how anyone takes this witness and what she says seriously. It seems like she had a story she tried sticking to and when the questions made her deviate from that story, she was lost and angered. Add in that statements that she originally made to Crump contradicts what she said in court today, and it doesn't look good.Who knows. The defense has overnight to think of questions to press her with tomorrow and the prosecution have overnight to try and settle her down and coach her. I think the defense has an easier job tonight.

No, they don't. The judge instructed her to not speak to anyone about her testimony today or about the testimony she may give tomorrow.

 

[avoiding injuries]

So unfortunately I didn't see the last 15 minutes of her testimony (I'm going to try and watch it now.) In your guys opinion, did the defense shake her credibility enough so that Zimmerman's testimony won't be necessary? Or do you think the jury is going to buy into the "get off me, get off me" ?

I can't speak for the jurors, obviously, but I don't know how anyone takes this witness and what she says seriously. It seems like she had a story she tried sticking to and when the questions made her deviate from that story, she was lost and angered. Add in that statements that she originally made to Crump contradicts what she said in court today, and it doesn't look good.Who knows. The defense has overnight to think of questions to press her with tomorrow and the prosecution have overnight to try and settle her down and coach her. I think the defense has an easier job tonight.

I'm fairly sure the prosecution has the easier job because they can't meet with her about anything to do with the trial. She's still technically under oath, so any meetings would not be proper.

I stand corrected. Anyone think she won't talk to someone tonight about the trial?

 

[Gawain]

So unfortunately I didn't see the last 15 minutes of her testimony (I'm going to try and watch it now.) In your guys opinion, did the defense shake her credibility enough so that Zimmerman's testimony won't be necessary? Or do you think the jury is going to buy into the "get off me, get off me" ?

I can't speak for the jurors, obviously, but I don't know how anyone takes this witness and what she says seriously. It seems like she had a story she tried sticking to and when the questions made her deviate from that story, she was lost and angered. Add in that statements that she originally made to Crump contradicts what she said in court today, and it doesn't look good.Who knows. The defense has overnight to think of questions to press her with tomorrow and the prosecution have overnight to try and settle her down and coach her. I think the defense has an easier job tonight.

I'm fairly sure the prosecution has the easier job because they can't meet with her about anything to do with the trial. She's still technically under oath, so any meetings would not be proper.

I stand corrected. Anyone think she won't talk to someone tonight about the trial?

If she isn't an idiot...ummm, oh wait. I think the state would settle for her not doing an AMA right now.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

"I heard a pop pop pop"

its called an echo...echo ...echo

I hope you're kidding..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

you cant see his left arm in that pic...but it doesnt matter...hes not even close to the position zimm states 2 different times ....he made very sure to spread his arms way out to the sides

Cop said he was grasping his heart.. Cop just lied under oath.. Not to save his own ###, but to fry someone else's..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

A couple more hours.

What?!?!/

I think he is ####### with her. She is going to go nuts thinking all night she has two more hours of this.

I thought he just said that to assure the court broke for the day.

Agreed, send the jury to think about those last 5mins all night.. This works in the defenses favor, ended the day pretty strong.. The rest of the day was a wreck, but ending the day on that note was a minor victory..

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Sure she is biased, not sure why this stuff makes her uncredible.

She admitted on the stand that she has lied under oath several times..

When was she under oath? They impeached her with depositions? I missed that part.

 

[Christo]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Sure she is biased, not sure why this stuff makes her uncredible.

She admitted on the stand that she has lied under oath several times..

When was she under oath? They impeached her with depositions? I missed that part.

Today she testified that it was Martin yelling get off of me. In her deposition she confirmed prior statements she made to the Martins' attorney that were reported in the press that it "could have been" Martin. They used the deposition transcript to impeach today's testimony.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Sure she is biased, not sure why this stuff makes her uncredible.

She admitted on the stand that she has lied under oath several times..

When was she under oath? They impeached her with depositions? I missed that part.

Today she testified that it was Martin yelling get off of me. In her deposition she confirmed prior statements she made to the Martins' attorney that were reported in the press that it "could have been" Martin. They used the deposition transcript to impeach today's testimony.

So on re-direct you confirm that she said "could have been" and ask her whether her opinion today is that yes it could have been and in fact was. Her previous statement was towards the affirmative. It's not like she said it was not or could not have been.

In the deposition, did she just confirm what she said in the recorded interview, which she's said was answered rushed, or was this a new statement?

Was the deposition question "what did you say during the recorded interview?" Or "what did you hear that night?"?

 

[Christo]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Sure she is biased, not sure why this stuff makes her uncredible.

She admitted on the stand that she has lied under oath several times..

When was she under oath? They impeached her with depositions? I missed that part.

Today she testified that it was Martin yelling get off of me. In her deposition she confirmed prior statements she made to the Martins' attorney that were reported in the press that it "could have been" Martin. They used the deposition transcript to impeach today's testimony.

So on re-direct you confirm that she said "could have been" and ask her whether her opinion today is that yes it could have been and in fact was. Her previous statement was towards the affirmative. It's not like she said it was not or could not have been.

In the deposition, did she just confirm what she said in the recorded interview, which she's said was answered rushed, or was this a new statement?

Was the deposition question "what did you say during the recorded interview?" Or "what did you hear that night?"?

I didn't memorize what was said. And neither did the jurors. But they now know that at one point she told someone she wasn't sure. That she later confirmed those statements under oath. But now she's claiming to be sure.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Considering who she is (uneducated, unsophisticated, young, not well spoken) I think she is doing about as well as the prosecution could ask for. She's not the ideal person to have as the last contact with the victim, but I think she's authentic. Bias will be assumed, but I don't know that the jury will just disregard what she's said.

Sure she is biased, not sure why this stuff makes her uncredible.

She admitted on the stand that she has lied under oath several times..

When was she under oath? They impeached her with depositions? I missed that part.

Today she testified that it was Martin yelling get off of me. In her deposition she confirmed prior statements she made to the Martins' attorney that were reported in the press that it "could have been" Martin. They used the deposition transcript to impeach today's testimony.

So on re-direct you confirm that she said "could have been" and ask her whether her opinion today is that yes it could have been and in fact was. Her previous statement was towards the affirmative. It's not like she said it was not or could not have been.In the deposition, did she just confirm what she said in the recorded interview, which she's said was answered rushed, or was this a new statement?

Was the deposition question "what did you say during the recorded interview?" Or "what did you hear that night?"?

I didn't memorize what was said. And neither did the jurors. But they now know that at one point she told someone she wasn't sure. That she later confirmed those statements under oath. But now she's claiming to be sure.

It's still affirmative though. I guess we will see how the jury interprets it.