# In which Stoid (The Prosecutor) Cross-examines Bricker (George Zimmerman) **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [April 22, 2012, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561 "2012-04-22T05:35:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/201 "2012-04-26T18:51:24Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > What you describe sounds like [this](http://stoid.org/mocktrial/firstmeet.jpg) - is that a fair representation of your positions when you first saw Martin on your way back to your truck? No. I was farther down the walkway and so was he, like three doors farther down, in the direction of where I now know his father’s house was. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/202 "2012-04-26T19:23:09Z")
Like [this](http://stoid.org/mocktrial/firstmeetB.jpg)? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/203 "2012-04-26T20:13:25Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Like [this](http://stoid.org/mocktrial/firstmeetB.jpg)? That’s about right, yes. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/204 "2012-04-26T20:24:36Z")
Mr. Zimmerman, according to a Internet source named Bricker, you were secretly harboring some lustful fantasies about Mr. Martin. Are Mr. Bricker’s statements factual? ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/205 "2012-04-26T20:25:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s about right, yes. You’ve got him right where you want him now **Stoid**. Time for the kill. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/206 "2012-04-26T20:28:09Z")
No, no…let’s get into his mental state first. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/207 "2012-04-26T22:19:18Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Agree. Bricker has another advantage which is that the questions and answers are in writing. He can think about the question and respond at his leisure. He has time to consider whether his answers are consistent with the other evidence and his other testimony. He can go back and read his prior responses too. > > In real life, a person on the witness stand does not have that luxury. Of course lying is much more cognitively demanding than telling the truth because a liar has to think about whether the story he is telling is internally consistent. > > The only way that **Stoid** will be able to nail **Bricker** is if there is a glaring contradiction in Zimmerman’s story. Or some aspect of it which is simply not credible. Yes to all of these. You can also see how his answers are carefully phrased to prevent contradictions. I bet there are thousands of defense attorneys who wish that that they \*\*Bricker \*\*as a client. (Not that I’m suggesting **Bricker** commit any crime, but it seems such a shame that his talents are wasted. Maybe shoplifting something from 7-11 would be in order?) I read an account from a prosecutor who said how hard it was to successfully nail defendants on cross examinations. A halfway decent attorney isn’t going to allow a poor liar to take the stand. The fact that **Bricker** ’s attorney is allowing his client to take the stand shows the confidence he has. Of course, the attorney could also be taking into consideration the overconfidence and inexperience of the prosecution. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2012, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/208 "2012-04-26T23:16:50Z")
Now I’d like to back up and ask you some things about [your call to police](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS6Rrtka1o0). The call lasted for four minutes and five seconds. You have testified that you passed Mr. Martin, then stopped to make the call. You were on the south side of the street, and Martin was walking on the lawn on the north. You describe in the call what you’ve told us regarding your suspicions. Then you tell the dispatcher that he is staring at you: > [@](#): > > Dispatcher: Sanford Police Department. … > > Zimmerman: Hey we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there’s a > real suspicious guy, uh, [near] Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can > give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or > he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking > about. > > Dispatcher: OK, and this guy is he white, black, or Hispanic? > > Zimmerman: He looks black. > :30 > Dispatcher: Did you see what he was wearing? > > Zimmerman: Yeah. A dark hoodie, like a grey hoodie, and either jeans or > sweatpants and white tennis shoes. He’s [unintelligible], he was just staring. > > Dispatcher: OK, he’s just walking around the area… > > Zimmerman: …looking at all the houses. > > Dispatcher: OK… > > **Zimmerman: Now he’s just staring at me.** > :47 Did Martin stare at you as he walked past your truck, or did he stop, face you, and stare at you for any length of time? Since you were reporting his movements and describing him to the dispatcher, is it correct to say that you were also “staring” at Martin from the truck, which is to say you were watching him the whole time you were on the phone? Then you said: > [@](#): > > Dispatcher: OK—you said it’s 1111 Retreat View? Or 111? > > Zimmerman: That’s the clubhouse… > > Dispatcher: That’s the clubhouse, do you know what the—he’s near the > clubhouse right now? > > Zimmerman: **Yeah, now he’s coming towards me.** > > Dispatcher: OK. > 1:00 Did that mean that Martin was still behind your truck and was continuing to head in the same direction he had been, or were you saying that he was changing course to actually come towards you in your truck on the south side of the street from his position on the north? You went on to say: > [@](#): > > Zimmerman: He’s got his hand in his waistband. And he’s a black male. > > Dispatcher: How old would you say he looks? > > Zimmerman: He’s got button on his shirt, late teens. > > Dispatcher: Late teens ok. > > Zimmerman: Somethings wrong with him. Yup, he’s coming to check me out, he’s got > something in his hands, I don’t know what his deal is. > > Dispatcher: Just let me know if he does anything ok > > Zimmerman: How long until you get an officer over here? > > Dispatcher: Yeah we’ve got someone on the way, just let me know if this guy does > anything else. > > 1:35 > > Zimmerman: Okay. **These assholes they always get away.** When you come to the > clubhouse you come straight in and make a left. Actually you would go past the > clubhouse. > > Dispatcher: So it’s on the lefthand side from the clubhouse? > > Zimmerman: No you go in straight through the entrance and then you make a left…uh you go straight in, don’t turn, and make a left.\*\* Shit he’s running.\*\* > > 2:07 Why did you say “these assholes always get away”, and why did you say it at that point? He didn’t start to run until 20 seconds or so later. You have testified that Martin broke into a run close to the cutaway, as indicated on the map, so he had gotten fairly well past you at that point, since you also testified that you stopped to make the call very shortly after passing Martin. Then: > [@](#): > > Dispatcher: He’s running? Which way is he running? > > Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance [SOUND OF CAR DOOR OPENING - BEEPING-THEN SLAM] 2:13 to the neighborhood. > > (From this point, there is the sound of wind against the mic) What happened at this point in the call, Mr. Zimmerman? Next: > [@](#): > > Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards? > > Zimmerman: The back entrance…fucking punks > > Dispatcher: Are you following him? > > Zimmerman: Yeah > > Dispatcher: Ok, we don’t need you to do that. > > Zimmerman: Ok > 2:28 > (wind) > > Dispatcher: Alright sir what is your name? > > Zimmerman: George…He ran. > > Dispatcher: Alright George what’s your last name? > > Zimmerman: Zimmerman > > Dispatcher: And George what’s the phone number you’re calling from? > > Zimmerman: [redacted] > > Dispatcher: Alright George we do have them on the way, do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there? > > (wind not noticable) > 2:55 Then there’s another minute of discussion about the police and your location: > [@](#): > > Zimmerman: Alright, where you going to meet with them at? > Zimmerman: If they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the > club house, and uh, straight past the club house and make a left, and then they > go past the mailboxes, that’s my truck…[unintelligible] > Dispatcher: What address are you parked in front of? > Zimmerman: I don’t know, it’s a cut through so I don’t know the address. > Dispatcher: Okay do you live in the area? > Zimmerman: Yeah, I…[unintelligible] > Dispatcher: What’s your apartment number? > Zimmerman: It’s a home it’s 1950, oh crap I don’t want to give it all out, I don’t > know where this kid is. > Dispatcher: Okay do you want to just meet with them right near the mailboxes > then? > 3:42 > > Zimmerman: Yeah that’s fine. > Dispatcher: Alright George, I’ll let them know to meet you around there okay? > Zimmerman: Actually could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at? > Dispatcher: Okay, yeah that’s no problem. > Zimmerman: Should I give you my number or you got it? > Dispatcher: Yeah I got it [redacted] > Zimmerman: Yeah you got it. > Dispatcher: Okay no problem, I’ll let them know to call you when you’re in the > area. > Zimmerman: Thanks. > Dispatcher: You’re welcome. > 4:05 Mr. Zimmerman, according to your statements to police, your deposition, your directed testimony, and your refresher narrative, you didn’t know where you were. Yet you describe the location flawlessly in this conversation with the dispatcher, which isn’t surprisng, because the distance between the clubhouse, where you first observed Martin, to the cutaway where he began running **is a straight line of 320 feet…100 yards, a football field.** So **when** did you become confused about your location, forcing you to exit the truck to look at the stop sign that you couldn’t read in the dark and the rain, but \*\*which didn’t actually turn out to even exist? \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/209 "2012-04-27T00:01:36Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Now I’d like to back up and ask you some things about [your call to police](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS6Rrtka1o0). > > The call lasted for four minutes and five seconds. You have testified that you passed Mr. Martin, then stopped to make the call. You were on the south side of the street, and Martin was walking on the lawn on the north. You describe in the call what you’ve told us regarding your suspicions. > > Then you tell the dispatcher that he is staring at you: > Did Martin stare at you as he walked past your truck, or did he stop, face you, and stare at you for any length of time? Both. When he saw I had noticed him casing the houses - or what I thought then was casing the houses - he looked at me. Then he pretended he was looking around at other stuff but his gaze would come back to me. > [@](#): > > Since you were reporting his movements and describing him to the dispatcher, is it correct to say that you were also “staring” at Martin from the truck, which is to say you were watching him the whole time you were on the phone? Yeah, I had my eyes on him, sure. > [@](#): > > Did that mean that Martin was still behind your truck and was continuing to head in the same direction he had been, or were you saying that he was changing course to actually come towards you in your truck on the south side of the street from his position on the north? The first. He didn’t cross the street. He stayed roughly on the yellow arrow (2) from your first map, only more sort of in the shadows. > [@](#): > > Why did you say “these assholes always get away”, and why did you say it at that point? He didn’t start to run until 20 seconds or so later. _I’d object to the ‘why’ question, but let’s assume I lose the argument because it goes to establishing the depraved mind, hatred, or I’ll will._ Because the police were not showing up and I started to think that yet again the suspect would get away. I probably shouldn’t have said ‘asshole,’ but I thought he was a burglar and that seemed like an ok thing to call a burglar. [/quote] You have testified that Martin broke into a run close to the cutaway, as indicated on the map, so he had gotten fairly well past you at that point, since you also testified that you stopped to make the call very shortly after passing Martin. _Objection to counsel’s summary of the testimony and to counsel’s argument. If the state wants to know how far past Zimmerman Martin was, she can ask. She can’t argue conclusions in the middle of her cross._ > [@](#): > > What happened at this point in the call, Mr. Zimmerman? I got out of my truck. > [@](#): > > Then there’s another minute of discussion about the police and your location: > Mr. Zimmerman, according to your statements to police, your deposition, your directed testimony, and your refresher narrative, you didn’t know where you were. Yet you describe the location flawlessly in this conversation with the dispatcher, which isn’t surprisng, because the distance between the clubhouse, where you first observed Martin, to the cutaway where he began running **is a straight line of 320 feet…100 yards, a football field.** So **when** did you become confused about your location, forcing you to exit the truck to look at the stop sign that you couldn’t read in the dark and the rain, but \*\*which didn’t actually turn out to even exist? \*\* Ma’am, I don’t know how you say I was flawless, when right there on the tape I told the dispatcher that I didn’t know the address. And I never said I went to look at a stop sign. I was trying to find a street sign to conform which curve of Twin Trees I was at. And the street signs have little numbers at the bottom of the street name so I could figure out which block it was. Yeah, maybe I shoulda just known, but it was dark and raining, and you can hear me on the tape telling the dispatcher I don’t know where I am. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/210 "2012-04-27T01:36:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Both. When he saw I had noticed him casing the houses or what I thought then was casing the houses Yes, the basis of your suspicions… since your first sighting of him was by the clubhouse, not by any residence, what house did you think he was “casing”, Mr. Zimmerman? > [@](#): > > - he looked at me. Then he pretended he was looking around at other stuff but his gaze would come back to me. So he was actually meaning to be looking at you, and only pretending to be looking at other things? (_Object to “pretending” for speculation but I’d rather ask this question_) > [@](#): > > Yeah, I had my eyes on him, sure. Have you ever been the subject of someone’s scrutiny, Mr. Zimmerman, in a manner similar to the way Trayvon was the subject of your scrutiny that night? > [@](#): > > The first. He didn’t cross the street. He stayed roughly on the yellow arrow (2) from your first map, only more sort of in the shadows. So actually, rather than “coming towards” you, he was simply continuing in the same direction he’d already been traveling, wasn’t he? > [@](#): > > _I’d object to the ‘why’ question, but let’s assume I lose the argument because it goes to establishing the depraved mind, hatred, or I’ll will._ _Why? If I’m not trying to establish a specific element of the crime I’m not allowed to ask you why you did something? I don’t get it…?_ > [@](#): > > You have testified that Martin broke into a run close to the cutaway, as indicated on the map, so he had gotten fairly well past you at that point, since you also testified that you stopped to make the call very shortly after passing Martin. > _Objection to counsel’s summary of the testimony and to counsel’s argument. If the state wants to know how far past Zimmerman Martin was, she can ask. She can’t argue conclusions in the middle of her cross._ _She isn’t arguing, she is trying, given the way we’re doing this, to keep the witness and the court on the same page of her understanding of what we’ve already heard as she asks the question about something related to that._ _Without asking again._ > [@](#): > > I got out of my truck. To do what? > [@](#): > > Ma’am, I don’t know how you say I was flawless, when right there on the tape I told the dispatcher that I didn’t know the address. Not knowing the address is not the same as not knowing where you are, Mr. Zimmerman. We can all see on the map that there are only two options for turning left after you enter the gate. You told the dispatcher: > [@](#): > > If they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the > club house, and uh, straight past the club house and make a left, and then they > go past the mailboxes, that’s my truck… Which described your location _exactly_. > [@](#): > > and you can hear me on the tape telling the dispatcher I don’t know where I am. No, Mr. Zimmerman, we do not at any time hear you saying that you do not know where you are. What we hear you saying is this: > [@](#): > > Dispatcher: What **address** are you parked in front of? > Zimmerman: I don’t know, it’s a cut through so **I don’t know the address.** It is clear from your description that you know _precisely_ where you are. Yet you have repeatedly claimed that you got out of your truck to look at a street sign to determine where you were. You said: > [@](#): > > I didn’t know which end of the road I was at and in the dark the houses all look the same. I got out of my vehicle to check the street sign because the light wasn’t good enough to see it from my car, especially in the rain. But we’ve just heard that 1. You knew exactly which end of the road you were on. 2. There was no street sign. Why did you get out of your truck, Mr. Zimmerman? ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/211 "2012-04-27T02:18:04Z")
Oh good fuck. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/212 "2012-04-27T02:27:10Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Yes, the basis of your suspicions… since your first sighting of him was by the clubhouse, not by any residence, what house did you think he was “casing”, Mr. Zimmerman? The houses across the street, and the ones towards the pond. > [@](#): > > So he was actually meaning to be looking at you, and only pretending to be looking at other things? That was my impression, yes. > [@](#): > > Have you ever been the subject of someone’s scrutiny, Mr. Zimmerman, in a manner similar to the way Trayvon was the subject of your scrutiny that night? _Stoid, this is a really bad question. The reason is that the witness can pretty much answer however he wants and you have to accept it. It’s a collateral matter. It’s not relevant to any fact in question. As a witness, I might say something like yes, I have and I always knew that even though I wasn’t doing anything wrong I might appear that way to others and so I was always interested in clearing up any misunderstandings in a forthright fashion, and that’s what I always did. And you can’t do a blessed thing to contradict it. So I would like to assume the judge would take mercy on you and sua sponte stop the question._ > [@](#): > > So actually, rather than “coming towards” you, he was simply continuing in the same direction he’d already been traveling, wasn’t he? I guess so, basically. > [@](#): > > Why? If I’m not trying to establish a specific element of the crime I’m not allowed to ask you why you did something? I don’t get it…? - There are a boatload of reasons. In general, unless intent is being established, why is not particularly relevant, and it allows the witness to be very self-serving in his answer, since you can’t peer into his head to show he’s not being honest, and you can’t impeach on collateral matters. \* > [@](#): > > \*_She isn’t arguing, she is trying, given the way we’re doing this, to keep the witness and the court on the same page of her understanding of what we’ve already heard as she asks the question about something related to that._ _Without asking again._ - Ok. But when you take a summary of the question and turn it into a conclusion, not a question, that’s argument. I agree this format makes it tougher to be a purist on the point.\* > [@](#): > > To do what? > > Not knowing the address is not the same as not knowing where you are, Mr. Zimmerman. We can all see on the map that there are only two options for turning left after you enter the gate. You told the dispatcher: > > Which described your location _exactly_. > No, Mr. Zimmerman, we do not at any time hear you saying that you do not know where you are. What we hear you saying is this: > It is clear from your description that you know _precisely_ where you are. Yet you have repeatedly claimed that you got out of your truck to look at a street sign to determine where you were. You said: > > But we’ve just heard that > > 1. You knew exactly which end of the road you were on. > 2. There was no street sign. > > Why did you get out of your truck, Mr. Zimmerman? To look for a street sign that would show me the address. I knew where I was in the sense that I wasn’t utterly lost, but I didn’t know the address and I wasn’t sure exactly which cut through I was at. I thought there was a street sign there that I just couldn’t see. That’s what I told the dispatcher at the time. It’s no big mystery. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/213 "2012-04-27T02:29:30Z")
_And at this time I’d like to make a continuing objection to the prosecution’s asking Mr Zimmerman why he got out of his truck. It’s badgering, and it’s been asked and answered repeatedly._ ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/214 "2012-04-27T02:44:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > _And at this time I’d like to make a continuing objection to the prosecution’s asking Mr Zimmerman why he got out of his truck. It’s badgering, and it’s been asked and answered repeatedly._ With different answers, I’m trying to find out which one is true. But I’ll ask a different question: Mr. Zimmerman, why do you continue to claim that the reason you got out of your truck was to check a street sign that you couldn’t see because it was too dark, when: 1. No such sign existed. 2. You knew exactly where you were 3. You were following Trayvon at the moment he began running? Isn’t the simple truth, Mr. Zimmerman, that you got out of your truck to follow Martin, wich you did until you found him? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/215 "2012-04-27T02:45:42Z")
Is “_Objection, asked and answered_” another one of those phrases written in clear English you are somehow unable to comprehend? ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/216 "2012-04-27T03:03:10Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Is “_Objection, asked and answered_” another one of those phrases written in clear English you are somehow unable to comprehend? It’s a well established fact that **SOMETHINGS NEED TO BE WRITTEN LARGE, BOLD, UNDERLINED AND IN RED** for them to be true. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/217 "2012-04-27T04:06:25Z")
_(I didn’t see that you had posted answers before the continuing objection…)_ > [@Bricker](#): > > The houses across the street, and the ones towards the pond. You saw him by the clubhouse: he was 100 feet from any house. Walking slowly it would have taken him awhile to get to one to look into. When was he near those houses so that you had this impression that he was casing them? > [@](#): > > That was my impression, yes. Your impression was that you were his true focus and he was merely pretending to look elsewhere. Your impression was also that he was peering into people’s homes to see if they were home, which he could not have been doing by the clubhouse when you first saw him. So are you saying now that your impression was that he was pretending to peer into people’s homes, and if so why would that make you suspicious? I sense an objection…I’ll withdraw the question. > [@](#): > > To look for a street sign that would show me the address. You mean like [the street sign in front of the development](http://stoid.org/mocktrial/streetsign.jpg), which does not? > [@](#): > > I knew where I was in the sense that I wasn’t utterly lost, but I didn’t know the address and I wasn’t sure exactly which cut through I was at. Please show us on [this map of the whole development](http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.792517,-81.33065&spn=0.002934,0.004077&t=h&z=18&lci=com.panoramio.all) what _other_ cut through you _could_ have been at…if any. And please explain why, if you did not know “which cut through” you were at, you were able to tell the dispatcher this: > [@](#): > > Dispatcher: He’s running? Which way is he running? > > Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood. > > Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards? > > Zimmerman: The back entrance…fucking punks > [@](#): > > I thought there was a street sign there that I just couldn’t see. > > That’s what I told the dispatcher at the time. It’s no big mystery. I’m sorry, I’m not clear on what you are saying you told the dispatcher. Are you saying you told the dispatcher that you were looking at the street sign? ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/218 "2012-04-27T05:55:14Z")
I think Bricker has demonstrated a way in which Zimmerman’s account “makes sense.” It’s kind of a weird format for a Q&A session but overall I thought Stoid did just fine. ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/219 "2012-04-27T06:56:44Z")
I have to agree. What this thread really needs or needed is a judge, just to keep things moving and to cut out repetition. This kind of format could be interesting applied to any number of topics. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/220 "2012-04-27T07:15:46Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > … When he saw I had noticed him casing the houses … I’m quite curious about exactly how “casing a house” and “looking at a house” differ. CMC fnord! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561.md?page=12)