The state of FL v. George Zimmerman

[Dancing David]

For those of us who agree that so far the states case is no looking good for them, and assuming that continues to be the case, what do you think the likelihood of putting GZ on the stand is?

Very high he is the only witness to the state of events.

 

[WildCat]

Very high he is the only witness to the state of events.

He stated his version of the events, he even re-enacted it. That was recorded and will be presented as evidence, no need to put him on the stand to get his version of events.

 

[casebro]

Have we not heard from an M.E. yet, about Martin and bruised knuckles?

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

He stated his version of the events, he even re-enacted it. That was recorded and will be presented as evidence, no need to put him on the stand to get his version of events.

Great point. They should be able to do an excellent version of presenting his story without calling him.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Have we not heard from an M.E. yet, about Martin and bruised knuckles?

We have not.

 

[Mike!]

Another innocent victim of spellcheck!

Why don't we wait until the trial before we declare innocence or guilt.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

MOM continuing with Lindzee Folgate (PA at Altamonte Family Practice)

He needs a box of blue arrows to track all the injuries he is pointing out on zimmermans skull. If only we had a picture like that ...

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

3:38 p.m. ET: On the way to the patrol car, Smith says Zimmerman told him something voluntarily:

"He stated to me that he was yelling for 'help' and that nobody would come help him," said Smith.

Zimmerman said it again once they got to the car.

"It was almost confusion. Sort of a confused look on his face," said Smith.

Ruh roh

 

[Dancing David]

He stated his version of the events, he even re-enacted it. That was recorded and will be presented as evidence, no need to put him on the stand to get his version of events.

I am thinking that it is something the prosecution will do, but I have no psychic powers.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Lindzee Folgate (PA at Altamonte Family Practice) all done.

Court recessed for the weekend. Poor jurors.

I think Folgate was potentially the best witness for the state so far.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Folgate: Injuries "consistent" with being punched in the nose and thrown to the ground.

She didn't even say "marginally"

 

[Mister Earl]

Hrm. Personally, I would think that they'd have to show that his injuries were consistent with someone taking a beating vicious enough to merit lethal force in self defense. The laws there and I probably don't agree on that point though.

#EDIT: Keep badgering folks, trying to get them to put the trial on the office TV. Not enough interest. Instead there's some pixar movie up. Blech.

 

[Cylinder]

MOM continuing with Lindzee Folgate (PA at Altamonte Family Practice)

He needs a box of blue arrows to track all the injuries he is pointing out on zimmermans skull. If only we had a picture like that ...

That's hurtful.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

It depends on who was attacking who. Generally it's hard to attack when you are on bottom.

How they ended up is not proof of how they started out. A person can initiate a fight and end up losing it.

 

[LashL]

Please, folks, stick to the trial in this thread. A lot of posts have been moved either to AAH or to the moderated thread, but I would ask that you police yourselves better, or there is a real risk that this thread will simply be closed and that will leave only the moderated thread. I would hate to see that happen while the trial is ongoing, and I expect that none of the participants in these threads would like to see that happen either. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Another bad day for the prosecution. As was asked above, what exactly are they trying to prove? If it's that something happened on that day, in that hour, then I would say they are winning. If it's something else, then not so much.

 

[Scopedog]

Apparently Zimmerman had his gun on his right hip. Yet I noticed that when he writes things down while sitting at the defendant table he uses his left hand.

Is he ambidextrous?

I've been left handed since childhood but I'm right eye dominant and shoot right-handed. I was an "expert" (highest level) rifleman in the Marine Corps and did all my rifle and pistol training right-handed. As a civilian I shoot right-handed with my 9mm Beretta 92FS, .44 and .50 Desert Eagle, .556 Kel-Tec SU-16, and 12GA Mossberg 500. I write with my left hand and am not ambidextrous.

 

[Limehouse Chappie]

Apparently Zimmerman had his gun on his right hip. Yet I noticed that when he writes things down while sitting at the defendant table he uses his left hand.

Is he ambidextrous?

pretty sure the defense addressed this in their opening statement to pre-empt the jury having a Matlock moment ("Did you see he writes with his LEFT HAND!!!"). Despite writing lefty, Zimmerman shoots right handed and his gun was positioned to accommodate his right handedness.

 

[Dancing David]

The law doesn't require a vicious beating to merit lethal force in self defence. What it requires is a situation in which there is a reasonable belief that death or serious injury can occur. Reality is that one punch or blow to the head can be deadly or cause serious injury. All the defence really need to do to show self defence is to so that Zimmerman was there legally and was experiencing blows to the head from Martin when he fired.

As will become apparent during deliberations, this will be the crux of the case, however as was pointed out in the older old thread by a at least one self professed lawyer, there is much more to self defense that just 'I had a reasonable fear of loss of life or serious physical injury', and that is where the deliberations are possibly going to be very complex. The actual setting of the events and the reasons for the confrontation do matter.

So if the jury decides that GZ was attacked without provocation, and that the acts of TM would lead a reasonable person to respond the way GZ did, then the self defense case will be easy. But as was pointed out in the old old thread, there is much more to a self defense claim than that.

So while the prosecution may seem to be failing right now, there is a long way to go, they are likely to try to establish that GZ did influence the attack by TM, that the choices made by GZ were not reasonable, that he contributed to the escalation of the confrontation and that the injuries being received by GZ were not life threatening or likely to cause serious physical harm.

Then it really comes down to the jury's impression of what happened and how they weigh all the facts, if they just focus on GZ being beat and feeling threatened then they will rule for self defense, but if they feel the other factors are there (which will be solely up to them) then the deliberations will get very long and drawn out with lots and lots of instructions.

And that is where the two narratives will matter.

 

[sgtbaker]

I had to work yesterday. The news is talking about a moment where John Goode expanded on certain details and when he was asked why he never mentioned that before, he said be was never asked. The analyst is likening the moment to Rachael's testimony. They showed a clip of her testimony but never showed what they were talking about regarding his testimony. Can anyone enlighten me on this one?