# 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:** 13
**Author:** ![Ellen\_Cherry](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellen_cherry/32/3600_2.png) [@Ellen\_Cherry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ellen_Cherry)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/241 "2012-04-28T14:31:32Z")
**Stoid** , since you seem determined to play this lawyer thing straight, I see no reason for the name-calling, in grayed out text yet, for any reason other than to be insulting. No insults outside the Pit. The rules, ya know. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/242 "2012-04-28T14:47:22Z")
> [@Ellen\_Cherry](#): > > **Stoid** , since you seem determined to play this lawyer thing straight, I see no reason for the name-calling, in grayed out text yet, for any reason other than to be insulting. No insults outside the Pit. The rules, ya know. I think it’s silly of her too, but you can’t really say she’s calling Bricker a liar - she’s calling his portrayal of Zimmerman a liar. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/243 "2012-04-28T15:55:32Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I think it’s silly of her too, but you can’t really say she’s calling Bricker a liar - she’s calling his portrayal of Zimmerman a liar. And for instructional purposes, I should point out that while a witness can drop inadmissible commentary into testimony – he’s a layman and doesn’t know better – the only place that business about inappropriate-question, beat, WITHDRAWN, works is in New York, and then only in the fictional New York of Dick Wolf Productions. I haven’t made a peep because as Zimmerman I’ve done the same thing. The way to prevent that is for the prosecutor to ask very specific, tightly controlled questions, and as Stoid observed at the start of this, this format doesn’t really lend itself to that; we’d be here until Zimmerman’s grandchild graduated law school. But because I hope this would be a little educational, I will make the point now that in real life, no judge or opposing counsel would sit still for more than one “withdrawn,” subterfuge. ---
**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 28, 2012, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/244 "2012-04-28T18:57:24Z")
When you decided to follow Trayvon and went looking for him, what did you plan to do when you found him? ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/245 "2012-04-28T21:10:19Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > When you decided to follow Trayvon and went looking for him, what did you plan to do when you found him? Murder him in cold blood. No, wait - I mean - _shit!_ ---
**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 28, 2012, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/246 "2012-04-28T21:20:15Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I think it’s silly of her too, but you can’t really say she’s calling Bricker a liar - she’s calling his portrayal of Zimmerman a liar. Yep. And not even really as part of the “experiment”, which is why I put it in super-pale…just an aside. Also why I phrased it like a 9 year old. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/247 "2012-04-28T21:22:25Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > When you decided to follow Trayvon and went looking for him, what did you plan to do when you found him? I wanted to ask him what his business was in the neighborhood and hopefully delay him so that we’d still be talking when the cops arrived. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/248 "2012-04-28T21:36:07Z")
I suppose it would be a tactical error for Zimmerman/ **Bricker** to reply “I’m the neighborhood watch guy - what the hell do you think I was gonna do?” IANAL, but come on, **Stoid** - what are you trying to establish here? You are giving him all these chances to repeat his story in a sympathetic way, and with no opportunity to impeach him on any of it. It seems screamingly obvious that Zimmerman would respond exactly as he has all along - "I was going to try to find out why he was there. When I did, he attacked me, knocked me down, and began banging my head on the ground. I was screaming for help, nobody came, I was in fear of my life from this enraged attacker, and he was sitting on top of me so I couldn’t get away. So I fired, once, I’m sorry it happened, I wish like hell it hadn’t happened. But it did, and I had no other choice." If that’s not an answer you wanted, then your question is poorly chosen and you should try another line of questioning. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![jonesj2205](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecc23a/32.png) [@jonesj2205](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jonesj2205)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/249 "2012-04-28T22:20:38Z")
Since Shodan brought it up, I want to say Stoid I think even if you manage to win some battles over details you’re losing the war. Part of it is probably the result of the medium the testimony is taking place (and part because of Bricker’s expertise) but repeatedly grilling over minor details would push juror members to empathize with Zimmerman. And that would be the last thing the prosecution would want. That said I want to thank both of you, this has been fascinating, much more so than I expected. ---
**Author:** ![BottledBlondJeanie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/0ea827/32.png) [@BottledBlondJeanie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BottledBlondJeanie)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/250 "2012-04-28T23:22:32Z")
I can’t say I’m completely unbiased as to posters, but think I am as to issues. If you want a “judge” on certain issues, I can pop in a couple of times a day and “rule.” I do this in trial competitions a lot. Obviously, there would be a relaxed standard as to the bases for objections. No harm if I’m not suitable. Of course, our esteemed admin, Gfactor, would make the best judge, but he’s probably too busy. I’m looking for brief-writing distractions. Kimmy Gibler would also be a great judge IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/251 "2012-04-29T00:05:07Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > IANAL, but come on, **Stoid** - what are you trying to establish here? As an aside, which is I guess all anybody can contribute to this thread: when you combine the fact that you can’t get a confession out of a witness who is only pretending to be a witness (and as such incapable of making a damning confession about anything) with the fact that this cross-examination is the only act in the play, the truth is that unless it’s scripted beforehand it’s actually impossible for **Stoid** to establish anything. Cross-examination isn’t really a tool that’s intended to accomplish that. It’s a difficult lesson to learn that no matter how clever you think you are, your incisive questioning is literally never going to make the witness succumb right there on the stand, and that the best strategy is usually to sit down and shut up about six questions before you want to, but it’s true, and that’s an interesting aspect of this thread, at least to me. If **Stoid** wants to demonstrate that Zimmerman’s real life story is bullshit, doing it by pretending to cross-examine somebody pretending to be him is just about the worst forum for it, because a question isn’t an argument and even to the extent that **Stoid** argues anyway, “Zimmerman” always gets the opportunity to explain it away. The worst of both worlds. Unless **Bricker** accidentally admits that somebody he’s never met and doesn’t really believe is a racist is actually a racist, that is, and maybe **Stoid** ’s got just the right question for that. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/252 "2012-04-29T02:26:58Z")
> [@BottledBlondJeanie](#): > > I can’t say I’m completely unbiased as to posters, but think I am as to issues. If you want a “judge” on certain issues, I can pop in a couple of times a day and “rule.” I do this in trial competitions a lot. > > Obviously, there would be a relaxed standard as to the bases for objections. No harm if I’m not suitable. Of course, our esteemed admin, Gfactor, would make the best judge, but he’s probably too busy. I’m looking for brief-writing distractions. Kimmy Gibler would also be a great judge IMHO. I would certainly accept and appreciate this offer, from you or either of the other names mentioned. I’ll defer to Stoid for her answer, however. ---
**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 29, 2012, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/253 "2012-04-29T03:05:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I would certainly accept and appreciate this offer, from you or either of the other names mentioned. I’ll defer to Stoid for her answer, however. Since the goal is not to perfectly represent a real trial, but simply to press Zimmy on his story, I think we’re fine the way we are so far. I’m content to have you point out the problems and make the rulings when and if it goes way too far outside the lines. ---
**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 29, 2012, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/254 "2012-04-29T03:33:14Z")
Unless you object to **BottledBlondJeanie** it sounds like a great idea. It will take some of the load off **Bricker** and keep things on track. ---
**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 29, 2012, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/255 "2012-04-29T04:44:36Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > As an aside, which is I guess all anybody can contribute to this thread: when you combine the fact that you can’t get a confession out of a witness who is only pretending to be a witness (and as such incapable of making a damning confession about anything) with the fact that this cross-examination is the only act in the play, the truth is that unless it’s scripted beforehand it’s actually impossible for **Stoid** to establish anything. Cross-examination isn’t really a tool that’s intended to accomplish that. In addition, the problem is that there are limited amounts of actual evidence to confront **Becker** /Zimmerman. If you look at the cross of Andrew Young in the Edwards trial, the defense has actual evidence to challenge Young’s stories and force him to admit double billing the donors, which is consistent with the defense’s version that this was Young’s doing. Interestingly, [the judge wasn’t happy](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/27/us/defense-in-edwards-case-to-keep-heat-on-former-aide.html?pagewanted=all)with the defense’s strategy of looking for tiny inconsistencies. > [@](#): > > The stealth billing was one of the few concrete admissions Mr. Lowell obtained from Mr. Young in a day of withering questioning. Much of it centered on small inconsistencies in his testimony, which described life as Mr. Young, his wife, Cheri, and their three small children opened their home to Ms. Hunter during the period in which Mr. Young claimed to be the child’s father. > > At one point, the proceedings got so bogged down in trivia that Judge Catherine C. Eagles of Federal District Court seemed to lose patience, calling the lawyers to the bench for what court observers said appeared to be a dressing down of Mr. Lowell. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/256 "2012-04-29T08:30:07Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > As an aside, which is I guess all anybody can contribute to this thread: when you combine the fact that you can’t get a confession out of a witness who is only pretending to be a witness (and as such incapable of making a damning confession about anything) with the fact that this cross-examination is the only act in the play, the truth is that unless it’s scripted beforehand it’s actually impossible for **Stoid** to establish anything. Cross-examination isn’t really a tool that’s intended to accomplish that. I disagree to an extent. If it really were the case that Zimmerman’s story just didn’t add up, pseudo-cross-examination would be a good way to shine a spotlight on the problems in his story. It’s common in internet discussions for people to hide the weaknesses in their position behind a cloak of ambiguity. Asking questions is often a great way to tear the cloak of ambiguity aside. However, in this case, as far as I can tell, Zimmerman’s position doesn’t have this problem. (That might change once further evidence comes out.) That being the case, I agree that cross-examination here is pretty ineffective. In real life, the prosecutor might throw out a few “hail-mary” questions and hope that Zimmerman blurts out something stupid. But that’s extremely unlikely here since **Bricker** has the time to think about all of his answers carefully and the smarts to do so. Of course, it doesn’t help that **Stoid** is pretty much a rookie at this game and doesn’t even know it. But I doubt that even a smart and experienced attorney with a thousand cross-examinations under his belt would be able to make much headway here. ---
**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 29, 2012, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/257 "2012-04-29T11:42:41Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > That being the case, I agree that cross-examination here is pretty ineffective. In real life, the prosecutor might throw out a few “hail-mary” questions and hope that Zimmerman blurts out something stupid. But that’s extremely unlikely here since **Bricker** has the time to think about all of his answers carefully and the smarts to do so. > > Of course, it doesn’t help that **Stoid** is pretty much a rookie at this game and doesn’t even know it. But I doubt that even a smart and experienced attorney with a thousand cross-examinations under his belt would be able to make much headway here. I completely agree with this. In a real trial, there’s the possibility that getting a witness flustered with pointing out minor inconsistencies would then lead to them acknowledging something major. However, not only is \*\*Bricker \*\*smart, he’s got the experience as well, and with this format, there is almost zero percent chance of him getting flustered. We are lucky, though that the challenge was from someone who is apparently unaware of what is allowed in questioning, as I agree with you that even a more experienced attorney would likely succeed, and hence would not have offered the challenge. If new evidence does emerge, it will not be a loss for **Bricker** , as the challenge was offered with the evidence given at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/258 "2012-04-29T14:00:13Z")
Sure, actual cross examination is very useful. My point is that it is literally impossible for **Bricker** to get flustered and admit something major, even if you don’t hallow the oratorical ground he walks on. He doesn’t know anything the rest of the public doesn’t know, which makes him invulnerable regardless of what **Stoid** asks him. The facts are off the table; she’s trying to get him to convict his own opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/259 "2012-04-29T14:12:07Z")
I for one would welcome your input, Judge **Jeanie**. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/260 "2012-04-29T16:41:33Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Sure, actual cross examination is very useful. Well, I think that internet cross-examination can be pretty productive too – just not in this case. If anyone would like to play the role of police investigator, I believe I could demonstrate --through internet cross-examination – that the case against Zimmerman is pretty thin (based on the evidence which has been published in the media so far.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561.md?page=14)