Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Rare Truth]

Did the prosecution actually say this?



https://twitter.com/wmfeorlando

Why not?

He pretty does have to take the stand if they're going SYG.

(which I can confidently predict, they won't)

 

[crimresearch]

MOM crossed the Rubicon.

To paraphrase, the events were of Trayvon Martin's doing.

If I were O'Mara, I'd serve the state with notice that he intends to call every police officer and complainant involved in any discrimination cases over the last say, 10 years, just to watch them freak out.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Did the prosecution actually say this?

https://twitter.com/wmfeorlando

I can't say for certain but that Twitter poster is probably like some posters here that hear/read one thing, then send it through their brain, and it comes out substantially different on the other end .

 

[Unabogie]

He said it though. Before, MOM was very careful about language and promoting comity.

His client is going to jail for a long, long time. I'd be pissed if he watched his language just for comity.

 

[crimresearch]

I can't say for certain but that Twitter poster is probably like some posters here that hear/read one thing, then send it through their brain, and it comes out substantially different on the other end .

That's why I asked, that would be a blunder on the prosecution's part.

ETA: nevermind

 

[Rare Truth]

Perceptions of the hearing" O'Mara looked weak, weak, weak. Yep, <shuffles feet> my client deceived. Thought he was going to cry.

Di La Rionda: Pow!

 

[katy_did]

Did the prosecution actually say this?



https://twitter.com/wmfeorlando

Yeah, he did (ETA: I mean, I can't swear to the exact words, but that was the sense of it!). It came across as a jab at Zimmerman for not testifying this time. MOM countered by saying Zimmerman would be very happy to testify at trial (ETA again: or WTTE).

 

[crimresearch]

Yeah, he did (ETA: I mean, I can't swear to the exact words, but that was the sense of it!). It came across as a jab at Zimmerman for not testifying this time. MOM countered by saying Zimmerman would be very happy to testify at trial (ETA again: or WTTE).

Thanks, that clears it up... I couldn't imagine them saying that they could/would force Zimmerman to testify at trial.

 

[Cylinder]

If I were O'Mara, I'd serve the state with notice that he intends to call every police officer and complainant involved in any discrimination cases over the last say, 10 years, just to watch them freak out.

LOL

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Yeah, if you want to dismiss the sentence that comes immediately after that.

"Now, of course he doesn't HAVE to testify...but when the judge tells him: it's important he testify, that pretty much sets up the dynamic. Yep. It is sure to be an explosive Zimmerific day."

The dynamic being, if he doesn't, that weighs damn heavily on the judges decision. Duh/

Your attempts at gotcha's fail so pitifully, so often.

I'm sorry, I don't know why you consider comparing what you predicted with reality to be a gotacha.

Do you mean when you posted:

It's going to be interesting to watch the Bond hearing tomorrow, and see ole Tugboat up on the stand again.

you actually meant that you didn't think you would see GZ testify ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It was the judge who said "it would be important" for George to speak in his own defense on this. We'll see how much he meant that.

If Lester grants GZ bond [at an equal or higher amount], does that mean it was or wasn't important ?

 

[Unabogie]

If Lester grants GZ bond [at an equal or higher amount], does that mean it was or wasn't important ?

Sometimes I think we spend all our time here parsing obvious language and arguing over word definitions.

If he grants bond, even though George refused to testify unless he could avoid being cross examined, then it wasn't as important as he said it would be.

When you say "at that time, it will be important for your client to explain himself" and then he doesn't do it, it's up to you to enforce your authority. If he doesn't then it wasn't as important as he claimed and I believe he will have lost some control of his courtroom in that case.

 

[This is The End]

Sometimes I think we spend all our time here parsing obvious language and arguing over word definitions.

If he grants bond, even though George refused to testify unless he could avoid being cross examined, then it wasn't as important as he said it would be.

When you say "at that time, it will be important for your client to explain himself" and then he doesn't do it, it's up to you to enforce your authority. If he doesn't then it wasn't as important as he claimed and I believe he will have lost some control of his courtroom in that case.

Exactly.

First we aren't supposed to believe Frank when Frank says that he is Z's friend.

Next we aren't supposed to believe the Judge when he says that it will be important for Z to testify at the next bond hearing.

Since when does "important" mean "there is zero chance I will grant bond if you do not testify".

Perhaps it just means it will be a higher bond?

Or perhaps it just means that Z and Z's lawyer will have sunk even lower in the judges opinion in general.

 

[crimresearch]

I'm sorry, I don't know why you consider comparing what you predicted with reality to be a gotacha.

Do you mean when you posted:

you actually meant that you didn't think you would see GZ testify ?

Apparently in some quarters, 'testify' can only mean 'break down sobbing on the stand and confess to everything'... like on TV.

 

[Cylinder]

When you say "at that time, it will be important for your client to explain himself" and then he doesn't do it, it's up to you to enforce your authority. If he doesn't then it wasn't as important as he claimed and I believe he will have lost some control of his courtroom in that case.

Lester had to created a record today of walking that statement back a bit.

 

[Unabogie]

Lester had to created a record today of walking that statement back a bit.

What did he say?

 

[Cylinder]

What did he say?

He restated that he wanted to make certain Zimmerman had the oppurtunity to testify.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Sometimes I think we spend all our time here parsing obvious language and arguing over word definitions.

Maybe that is because people are loathe to admit when they are wrong. For example, when they talk about GZ testifying today, and then backtrack and say that didn't actually mean they thought he would testify.
Not that I am accusing you of that, though.

If he grants bond, even though George refused to testify unless he could avoid being cross examined, then it wasn't as important as he said it would be.

When you say "at that time, it will be important for your client to explain himself" and then he doesn't do it, it's up to you to enforce your authority. If he doesn't then it wasn't as important as he claimed and I believe he will have lost some control of his courtroom in that case.

OK, that is what I understood you to mean. Just wanted to be clear.

 

[marplots]

It's a thankless task, making predictions on a forum. When you are right, people just say, "Well of course, that was obvious." When you are wrong, they quote you and rub your nose in it.

I predict this will continue to happen.

 

[Rare Truth]

As seen on the web:

"Not going to back door this in," Judge K Lester.

"It's not what he did to me, and he can't pick and choose." Judge K Lester.

"He mistrusted you, he mistrusted the system." Mark O'Mara

Words every presiding judge wants to hear ...