George Zimmerman Trial

[IrishLax]

My cliff notes on the prosecution's closing arguments:
-Crazy to me that Zimmerman didn't take the stand, and as such this is basically the "cross examination" of Zimmerman and the accounts he has previously given
-The entire strategy is to paint Zimmerman as a liar, and then have the conclusion be "if Zimmerman is a liar, then he is a murderer"
-I thought the prosecution did a really strong job of poking holes in Zimmerman's account of things and casting doubt. Enough doubt? I don't know.
-At times, the prosecution seemed to get really loose and all over the place... almost Chewbacca Defense style. I sat there going "wait... so... hold on..." as the prosecutor plowed along. I would say he sure wasn't very poignant.
-It's crazy how much emotional/prejudicial manipulation was attempted while the prosecutor at the end said "only pay attention to the facts/evidence and not emotions".... yeah OK... then why go through the 'one man was armed with a gun, the other with only Skittles' charade.
-I think the prosecution has generally done a horrendous job of establishing any kind of motive or the like for murder. Their motive seems to be "he wanted to be a cop/vigilante"... and that's just flimsy. I just don't really see how they can get murder. Manslaughter definitely seems like a possibility though.
-The quality of their "visual aid" Power Point presentation was high school at best. Definitely not professional grade. How does that happen? Do better.
-There were just a couple really ridiculous statements/blunders that seemed to make no sense and undermine the prosecution (which was trying very hard to show that Zimmerman's account didn't add up). The biggest of which was trying to imply that Martin was screaming because the screaming stopped after the gun shot.... uhhhhhhh.... obviously, as soon as the encounter ended via instant death from a gun wound there is neither the deceased nor the shooter would have any reason to keep screaming. So that implication isn't logically deductive at all.

All in all I'd give them a solid B. They did a good job villainizing Zimmerman and painting him as a liar. That's probably good enough to get some sort of conviction.

The biggest irony in all of the talk about "profiling" Martin as suspicious in an area with lots of break ins... is that he had been suspended from school 3 times, had been found with burglary tools and a bag of (stolen) jewelry, did drugs, and is the only person here with a history of assault (against his bus driver). Sooooo.... if he was profiling... well, retrospectively the shoe doth fit.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I feel where you're coming from...I just didn't get that vibe from him when he brought it up...Sure the legality would go away, but why would that be a character issue if legal? Couldn't the same then be said for alcohol?

Yep. If Martin were drunk at the time of the incident, it would be highly relevant on a number of issues. Might be even more relevant than levels of THC which, according to the toxicologist, "may have affected his behavior".

 

[Golden_Domer]

I feel where you're coming from...I just didn't get that vibe from him when he brought it up...Sure the legality would go away, but why would that be a character issue if legal? Couldn't the same then be said for alcohol?

In any criminal case, the prosecution could try to bolster the victim's reputation or show he/she had positive traits. That opens the door for the defense to rebut those assertions with whatever evidence they have. I don't know if that necessarily happened here, but just one example of how it could be used. I think the main purpose of the toxicology report in this case might be to show that TM may have been impaired at the time of the incident. The jury is allowed to consider each party's relative physical/mental capacity at the time of the incident. How much weight they offer a toxicology report like this is up to the jury, though.

Secondly, yes, the same could be said of alcohol.

 

[Booslum31]

You really shouldn't have an illicit drug in your system.

 

[NDohio]

My cliff notes on the prosecution's closing arguments:
-Crazy to me that Zimmerman didn't take the stand, and as such this is basically the "cross examination" of Zimmerman and the accounts he has previously given
-The entire strategy is to paint Zimmerman as a liar, and then have the conclusion be "if Zimmerman is a liar, then he is a murderer"
-I thought the prosecution did a really strong job of poking holes in Zimmerman's account of things and casting doubt. Enough doubt? I don't know.
-At times, the prosecution seemed to get really loose and all over the place... almost Chewbacca Defense style. I sat there going "wait... so... hold on..." as the prosecutor plowed along. I would say he sure wasn't very poignant.
-It's crazy how much emotional/prejudicial manipulation was attempted while the prosecutor at the end said "only pay attention to the facts/evidence and not emotions".... yeah OK... then why go through the 'one man was armed with a gun, the other with only Skittles' charade.
-I think the prosecution has generally done a horrendous job of establishing any kind of motive or the like for murder. Their motive seems to be "he wanted to be a cop/vigilante"... and that's just flimsy. I just don't really see how they can get murder. Manslaughter definitely seems like a possibility though.
-The quality of their "visual aid" Power Point presentation was high school at best. Definitely not professional grade. How does that happen? Do better.
-There were just a couple really ridiculous statements/blunders that seemed to make no sense and undermine the prosecution (which was trying very hard to show that Zimmerman's account didn't add up). The biggest of which was trying to imply that Martin was screaming because the screaming stopped after the gun shot.... uhhhhhhh.... obviously, as soon as the encounter ended via instant death from a gun wound there is neither the deceased nor the shooter would have any reason to keep screaming. So that implication isn't logically deductive at all.

All in all I'd give them a solid B. They did a good job villainizing Zimmerman and painting him as a liar. That's probably good enough to get some sort of conviction.

The biggest irony in all of the talk about "profiling" Martin as suspicious in an area with lots of break ins... is that he had been suspended from school 3 times, had been found with burglary tools and a bag of (stolen) jewelry, did drugs, and is the only person here with a history of assault (against his bus driver). Sooooo.... if he was profiling... well, retrospectively the shoe doth fit.

Nice run down. Thanks for this. I have been listening to this trial from the beginning but I was so busy at work today that I haven't had time to hear the closing arguments. I'll listen tape delay tonight, but this is a great overview.

 

[irishpat183]

My cliff notes on the prosecution's closing arguments:
-Crazy to me that Zimmerman didn't take the stand, and as such this is basically the "cross examination" of Zimmerman and the accounts he has previously given
-The entire strategy is to paint Zimmerman as a liar, and then have the conclusion be "if Zimmerman is a liar, then he is a murderer"
-I thought the prosecution did a really strong job of poking holes in Zimmerman's account of things and casting doubt. Enough doubt? I don't know.
-At times, the prosecution seemed to get really loose and all over the place... almost Chewbacca Defense style. I sat there going "wait... so... hold on..." as the prosecutor plowed along. I would say he sure wasn't very poignant.
-It's crazy how much emotional/prejudicial manipulation was attempted while the prosecutor at the end said "only pay attention to the facts/evidence and not emotions".... yeah OK... then why go through the 'one man was armed with a gun, the other with only Skittles' charade.
-I think the prosecution has generally done a horrendous job of establishing any kind of motive or the like for murder. Their motive seems to be "he wanted to be a cop/vigilante"... and that's just flimsy. I just don't really see how they can get murder. Manslaughter definitely seems like a possibility though.
-The quality of their "visual aid" Power Point presentation was high school at best. Definitely not professional grade. How does that happen? Do better.
-There were just a couple really ridiculous statements/blunders that seemed to make no sense and undermine the prosecution (which was trying very hard to show that Zimmerman's account didn't add up). The biggest of which was trying to imply that Martin was screaming because the screaming stopped after the gun shot.... uhhhhhhh.... obviously, as soon as the encounter ended via instant death from a gun wound there is neither the deceased nor the shooter would have any reason to keep screaming. So that implication isn't logically deductive at all.

All in all I'd give them a solid B. They did a good job villainizing Zimmerman and painting him as a liar. That's probably good enough to get some sort of conviction.

The biggest irony in all of the talk about "profiling" Martin as suspicious in an area with lots of break ins... is that he had been suspended from school 3 times, had been found with burglary tools and a bag of (stolen) jewelry, did drugs, and is the only person here with a history of assault (against his bus driver). Sooooo.... if he was profiling... well, retrospectively the shoe doth fit.

I stated that earlier...as bad as people wanna make GZ out to be...TM was a little thug.

In fact...GZ not only tutors disadvantaged black youth in the area. And few year ago a homeless black man was beat up by the cops. Wasn't nothing getting done about. Guess who was the one that was trying to get justice for the homeless guy. George Zimmerman.

 

[ACamp1900]

The character of either GZ or TM matter little to me outside of their lone encounter... Tm could be a Saint or a Thug, GZ could be a drug dealer for all I care...

not that character doesn't play into it... it obviously does in any case, but to the extent it has been played here.... just seems overdone and often like a smoke screen.

 

[Booslum31]

My cliff notes on the prosecution's closing arguments:
-Crazy to me that Zimmerman didn't take the stand, and as such this is basically the "cross examination" of Zimmerman and the accounts he has previously given
-The entire strategy is to paint Zimmerman as a liar, and then have the conclusion be "if Zimmerman is a liar, then he is a murderer"
-I thought the prosecution did a really strong job of poking holes in Zimmerman's account of things and casting doubt. Enough doubt? I don't know.
-At times, the prosecution seemed to get really loose and all over the place... almost Chewbacca Defense style. I sat there going "wait... so... hold on..." as the prosecutor plowed along. I would say he sure wasn't very poignant.
-It's crazy how much emotional/prejudicial manipulation was attempted while the prosecutor at the end said "only pay attention to the facts/evidence and not emotions".... yeah OK... then why go through the 'one man was armed with a gun, the other with only Skittles' charade.
-I think the prosecution has generally done a horrendous job of establishing any kind of motive or the like for murder. Their motive seems to be "he wanted to be a cop/vigilante"... and that's just flimsy. I just don't really see how they can get murder. Manslaughter definitely seems like a possibility though.
-The quality of their "visual aid" Power Point presentation was high school at best. Definitely not professional grade. How does that happen? Do better.
-There were just a couple really ridiculous statements/blunders that seemed to make no sense and undermine the prosecution (which was trying very hard to show that Zimmerman's account didn't add up). The biggest of which was trying to imply that Martin was screaming because the screaming stopped after the gun shot.... uhhhhhhh.... obviously, as soon as the encounter ended via instant death from a gun wound there is neither the deceased nor the shooter would have any reason to keep screaming. So that implication isn't logically deductive at all.

All in all I'd give them a solid B. They did a good job villainizing Zimmerman and painting him as a liar. That's probably good enough to get some sort of conviction.

The biggest irony in all of the talk about "profiling" Martin as suspicious in an area with lots of break ins... is that he had been suspended from school 3 times, had been found with burglary tools and a bag of (stolen) jewelry, did drugs, and is the only person here with a history of assault (against his bus driver). Sooooo.... if he was profiling... well, retrospectively the shoe doth fit.

Well done IrishLax. Now I don't have to watch TV tonight to get caught up. I will say that I didn't know some of the things (points) that you brought up in your final paragraph. They aren't getting any press...maybe I'm watching the wrong channel.

 

[irishpat183]

The character of either GZ or TM matter little to me outside of their lone encounter... Tm could be a Saint or a Thug, GZ could be a drug dealer for all I care...

not that character doesn't play into it... it obviously does in any case, but to the extent it has been played here.... just seems overdone and often like a smoke screen.

It does when you're a guy like GZ that is facing an angry mob and the media that is painting you as a "child killer"....

 

[drayer54]

Perspective,...

Dark, rainy night with two people who do not trust each others motives,...

Zimmerman called police dispatch @911 for investigation and back up,...

Martin called his woman to complain about a “Creepy, white, kill-my-neighbors cracker,” as Jeantel testified and added, “He looked like a creepy *** cracker.",...

Like I said once before,...with an addition,...or two,...

The "scared little kid" Trayvon called his slice, not 911,...

Zimmerman looks about as much like a "cracker" as I look like a Nordic demigod,...

17YO Trayvon could have outrun fat old white Hispanic Zimmerman all day plus the weekend,...

Trayvon chose fight not flight,...

Trayvon is every bit as responsible for the escalation as Zimmerman,...

Don't bring it if you can't win it, remember winning is never guaranteed,...

but then I'm not some weepy woman on a jury am I?!?!?!?

Nope, I'm a man, I see things as a man,...

Perspective,...

...

 

[irishpat183]

What locked down the resonable doubt for me...was when trayvons OWN DAD said it wasn't his son on the recording that the prosecution hung their hat on.

 

[ACamp1900]

From what I have heard and read, noting outwardly that I don’t trust much of the media on this issue, it is hard to avoid doubt either way… it’s hard for me to connect to those on either side that seem so dead set on what they feel happened… but that’s just me, to each their own.

 

[drayer54]

From what I have heard and read, noting outwardly that I don’t trust much of the media on this issue, it is hard to avoid doubt either way… it’s hard for me to connect to those on either side that seem so dead set on what they feel happened… but that’s just me, to each their own.

Trayvon Tragedy: Manufactured Racism? How NBC Edited Racism Into the George Zimmerman 911 Call - YouTube

 

[SaltyND24]

Yep. If Martin were drunk at the time of the incident, it would be highly relevant on a number of issues. Might be even more relevant than levels of THC which, according to the toxicologist, "may have affected his behavior".

I was saying it from the stance that a trace level of THC was found in his system...I was giving the other side of the argument and relating it to alcohol as to inquire whether a character issue could/should be brought up...Like a beer or something...

According to some of my cop buddies, they say that the biggest issue of weed and legalizing it stems from the inability to properly test for it in the field and/or establish a legal limit for it...Anybody here seem to agree with that?

 

[irishpat183]

From what I have heard and read, noting outwardly that I don’t trust much of the media on this issue, it is hard to avoid doubt either way… it’s hard for me to connect to those on either side that seem so dead set on what they feel happened… but that’s just me, to each their own.

SHUT YOUR MOUTH AND AGREE WITH ME!


I hear you. Whatever the outcome...it's a terrible situation and I don't wish this on any parent.

I feel bad for TM's family, I really do.

 

[irishpat183]

Trayvon Tragedy: Manufactured Racism? How NBC Edited Racism Into the George Zimmerman 911 Call - YouTube

Rhode Irish's and BobD's heads just exploded

 

[ND NYC]

could have sworn the judge did not allow the prosecution and had specific instructions to them not to use/discuss the term "racial profiling" before this trial started.

can anyone whose been watching this closely confirm this?

 

[IrishLax]

could have sworn the judge did not allow the prosecution and had specific instructions to them not to use/discuss the term "racial profiling" before this trial started.

can anyone whose been watching this closely confirm this?

No idea, but I'm pretty sure I heard them say "profiled" a bunch of times today.

 

[GoIrish41]

Any charge would be ridiculous and only, I repeat, ONLY to please the mob.

How the hell can they charge him with manslaugher....if it was in self defense(which beat the murder charge)?

Mob? Who exactly is this mob you speak of?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I was saying it from the stance that a trace level of THC was found in his system...I was giving the other side of the argument and relating it to alcohol as to inquire whether a character issue could/should be brought up...Like a beer or something...

According to some of my cop buddies, they say that the biggest issue of weed and legalizing it stems from the inability to properly test for it in the field and/or establish a legal limit for it...Anybody here seem to agree with that?

That may be why your buddies don't want it legalized, but they know how little was in his system. And they know what that relates to. And THC is not "consumed by the body" like alcohol, so you cannot know how "high" one person is versus another. But with the battery of tests they used on Martin in the autopsy, they know how much dope, (which is different fundamentally than how high), and when.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

No idea, but I'm pretty sure I heard them say "profiled" a bunch of times today.

They were instructed not to call Zimmerman a racist if I remember. Or something to that effect. No holds barred on profiling, which many police departments do as sop.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

From what I understand, from what I tried to read, Zimmerman can be not guilty of M2 because of self defense, stand your ground, etc., but still guilty of manslaughter because of (extreme) negligence. Is this true or did I read it wrong?

 

[GoIrish41]

could have sworn the judge did not allow the prosecution and had specific instructions to them not to use/discuss the term "racial profiling" before this trial started.

can anyone whose been watching this closely confirm this?

I think the ruling was that they couldn't use the term "racial profiling" but they could say "profiling". Didn't watch the entire closing argument today, but I didn't hear the word "racial" followed by the word "profiling"

 

[GoIrish41]

The biggest irony in all of the talk about "profiling" Martin as suspicious in an area with lots of break ins... is that he had been suspended from school 3 times, had been found with burglary tools and a bag of (stolen) jewelry, did drugs, and is the only person here with a history of assault (against his bus driver). Sooooo.... if he was profiling... well, retrospectively the shoe doth fit.

Read the article you were referring to here. Burglary tools = a screwdriver. In any case, this is the first I've heard about this and I still don't think it is particularly relevant in this case.

 

[jmurphy75]

Good article, worth the read
Black Racism Killed Trayvon ... - article - Bond Action

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Good article, worth the read
Black Racism Killed Trayvon ... - article - Bond Action

That guy has some serious man pebbles writing that.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

From what I understand, from what I tried to read, Zimmerman can be not guilty of M2 because of self defense, stand your ground, etc., but still guilty of manslaughter because of (extreme) negligence. Is this true or did I read it wrong?

No, Self-Defense under Florida law negates every type of killing. Including manslaughter. (Assuming, of course, the Prosecution doesn't disprove the self-defense theory beyond any reasonable doubt).

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Mob? Who exactly is this mob you speak of?

It was that big group of people yelling with Al Sharpton back in March. The DOJ spent money to help organize it.

 

[Rhode Irish]

The thing is, I'm with you until this last paragraph. Everything you're saying is fine. Then I get lost on your logic on a couple points. Please try to answer these if you have time:

-How does Zimmerman being armed speak to his credibility? It's perfectly legal to carry and lots of people carry every time they leave the house. That hurts his credibility (i.e. the fact that he owns/carries indicates he is untrustworthy) in what way?

It isn't so much the fact that he owns a gun, it's that he is out on the prowl looking for "bad guys." To me, that makes it much more likely that he would instigate. He thought Martin was a criminal in the process of committing a crime. Its like that "yada yada yada" thing from Seinfeld. We're left to fill in the gaps, and there is an obvious answer to what happened in the interim, and it isn't what Zimmerman posited.

-How does him following a teenager (mind you, there is no way Zimmerman would know that a person who is 4" taller than him in the dark and at a distance with a hood up is a "teenager" when he chose to follow him) speak to his character? He called 911 to report someone he thought looked suspicious and then followed them to see where they were going when they randomly took off running. Seems like the actions of a concerned citizen more than a vigilante murder. Someone with the intent of murder/assault logically would not call the cops to report a suspicious person... they would just go murder/assault them.

I don't necessarily think that Zimmerman was out to commit a murder that night. I think he is an idiot that got in over his head, freaked out and shot a kid. But that doesn't make him any less culpable. Being a nervous idiot posturing like a cop/batman isn't a defense to murder. My whole theory for how this went down is that this guy was genuinely concerned about crime in his neighborhood and genuinely wanted to do something about it, and he thought he caught one in the act and tried to do something about it. The problem is that it didn't turn out the way he thought. He got in over his head and shot the kid. You can't sympathize with him and excuse what happened because he thought Martin was a criminal because that isn't fair to Martin. He got approached, probably accosted and ultimately shot - and he didn't do anything wrong. Someone has to pay for that.

-Why do you not believe that Martin started the altercation? There are only two people testifying to the start of the altercation... Zimmerman and Martin's GF. Martin's GF even said that she encouraged Martin to keep going home but he didn't listen and instead turned around to confront Zimmerman. She said that on the stand.

I just don't. Maybe if he didn't get shot, Martin would be able to tell his side of the story. But like I said, common sense tells me that if one guy is geared up to fight crime and the other guy is just walking home to eat his skittles, then probably the guy looking to bust criminals is the one that started the altercation.

So basically what it comes down to is that you just personally do not believe Zimmerman and you also disagree with the law in play here that would allow him to be acquitted. Fine. When phrased like that instead of "Zimmerman deserve to die" it seems far more reasonable.

I mean, yeah that pretty much sums it up. I probably could have said something a little less provocative off the top. There is so much saber rattling in this thread that would lead you to believe that this is an innocent guy being dragged through the mud, it can be hard to show restraint.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Rhode Irish... I hope you never sit on a jury that has been charged with determining my fate.

The prosecution has the responsibility to prove that the defendent has committed a crime. That does not mean that they can guess how anything that night occurred. And sadly, their whole case was based on assumptions. And assumptions do not prove anything.

What started as a local story was grabbed onto by the left wing liberal media - insert NBC - and the race trading so called civil right leaders of the country - insert Al Sharpton here - and convicted the defendent before the first shred of any evidence was displayed. And sadly, our own President got in on the act.

When the race card is pulled out in any case, then logical thinking goes out the window. Pressure to even bring a case was tremendous and should never have been brought forth based on the evidence they had. Convicting a person on that basis and that basis alone is what will be criminal in this case. And if the defendent is aquitted, wonder if there will be pressure to prosecute any people that riot afterwards. Surely NBC, Al Sharpton, and the President would step forth calling for prosecution of those individuals. Surely...