# 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:** 6
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2012, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/101 "2012-04-23T18:53:38Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Very true, but are we really there yet? I mean we’re only what, about a half dozen questions in right? Maybe Stoid is just setting him up for something? 🙂 To tell you the truth, we may be. Judges have a lot of cases on their dockets, and they like to get through them as quickly as they can. So a prosecutor who opens cross-ex with patently irrelevant questions on homeowner association bylaws and “What would you have done if it wasn’t Martin doing whatever Martin was doing, but instead was a little old lady doing it?” and who looks like they have no real feasible plan to elicit testimony germane to the elements of the crime or to undermine the credibility of specific allegations by the witness using admissible testimony and evidence (_i.e._, **not** by asking “Mr. Zimmerman, you only suspected Trayvon because he was black, right? No? Let me ask you again: It was the black thing, right? Still no? Okay, I don’t mean to be repetitive, but I’m pretty sure you suspected Trayvon because he was black, correct? No again!? Dammit! This time say “yes” OK? … All right: Did you suspect Trayvon because he was black?”) is going to find their cross-ex (which can become quite dilatory if not kept on a short leash) rapidly concluded. ---
**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 23, 2012, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/102 "2012-04-23T19:22:10Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > So far, the lines of questioning have alternated between the irrelevant and the inadmissible. The questions I expected—going to getting Zimmerman to attempt to provide a _ **detailed** _ chronology of the events culminating in the shooting in order to see if Zimmerman could provide an internally consistent account (with **Sotid** impeaching as appropriate) that does not contradict any known objective or third-party evidence (with **Stoid** noting the existence of such contradictory evidence as appropriate) and which establishes his non-guilt on the charges—have rather remarkably not yet been asked. Maps. My witness could not review them and what I am seeking from my witness is specificity. it’s been adequately demonstrated that the story sells when it is general. I believe it falls apart when it gets specific. And it can’t be specific without the maps. so I couldn’t leap ahead I had to work with what my witness was giving me and wait for him to answer now that he has I will be asking more questions. ---
**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 23, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/103 "2012-04-23T19:32:44Z")
I admit that i’m not an expert on every single story that has emerged about this case, but i’m having trouble seeing how the whole map thing is going to substantially swing the issue in the direction that you suggest. Nothing that **Bricker** has said here so far, in my opinion, is likely to be substantially contradicted by more specific location information. And i say that as someone who believes that: 1. Zimmerman most likely did follow Martin mainly because he was black 2a) standing over a dead person with a smoking gun in your hand should be sufficient probably cause for an arrest 2b) Zimmerman should have been arrested at the scene 3a) the police department fucked up the initial investigation 3b) had the police come upon Martin standing over a dead Zimmerman, with all other evidence at the scene identical, they would have arrested Martin But what i believe, and what can be proved in a court of law, are not necessarily the same thing. You don’t seem very inclined to make such a distinction. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2012, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/104 "2012-04-23T19:39:53Z")
> [@Ron Burgundy](#): > > We now take you to WTF News reporter **TriPolar** who is reporting from the courthouse on the trial of George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. You may remember my in depth story on the … what? … Ok fine, here’s TriPolar Thank you Ron! Today’s court testimony has been riveting. State Attorney **Stoid** has asked the defendant several pointed questions about his reasons for finding Trayvon Martin \ suspicious \. Zimmerman responded that the young man was suspicious because he was walking slowly in the rain. There were also questions about when Zimmerman first saw Martin, but the answers were rather vague. Several legal analysts have wondered about the nature of State Attorney **Stoid** ’s questioning. Some think the questions are a waste of the limited time the prosecution has available, and if they’ll ever evoke a response from Zimmerman that would bolster the prosecution case. Other analysts believe the questions are reasonable. But like us, they are all just guessing because this is the end of the defense case and all the rest of the trial has been held behind closed doors and we have no idea what testimony preceded this. So far, the majority of legal analysts I’ve heard from agree that nobody has any idea what is going on here. Back to you Ron! > [@Ron Burgundy](#): > > No, really, I do have a boat. It’s a nice one… what? … Ok, well that was our on the scene reporter … probably telling us something very interesting. Our next story is about a cat born with two heads… ---
**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 23, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/105 "2012-04-23T20:10:00Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > All those questions would have been asked (and were in Bricker’s “direct”), and having him repeat it all again with even more sympathy doesn’t help you case in the least. Exactly. Useless for this exercise and nicely handled at the outset with the narrative refresher. > [@Fenris](#): > > Do those douchebaggy “Isn’t it true that…?” questions ever work to do anything except to make the person asking sound like a complete tool? But in my limited, yet extremely vivid experience, the douchebaggy tools that like those questions and that whole style of inquiry are 100% ok with being complete doucheytools AND: it works. A lot. (That’s also why they lie. It works. A lot.) I was deposed for two days (!) in my civil adventure, and the fella deposing me _LOVED_ those questions, along with"When did you stop beating your wife?" questions. The goal, obviously, being to get you to “admit” something that isn’t true just because of the way it was phrased. Fortunately for me (not that it mattered in the big picture…) I happen to be a really gifted [Taboo](http://www.hasbro.com/games/en_US/shop/details.cfm?R=AD4902E9-5056-900B-1073-EAB639BF818E:en_US) player - seriously, I’m a like a fucking savant or something - and it turns out that testifying is _ **a lot** _ like playing Taboo, most especially when you are dealing with someone who likes those kinds of questions and is absolutely determined to wear you down with them. So because of my awesome applied Taboo skills, I have to say that even to this day, with everything, I still enjoy the hell out of reading those deposition transcripts. By the end of Day Two he was literally spitting on himself with frustration. And his assistant later told me (we were chummy…don’t ask) that she was giving the task of finding something to hang me with and she said she couldn’t find a single thing. So that was fun. Gotta get your jollies where you can… > [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > **[del]Stoid[/del]**[del]'s[/del] **Bricker** ’s thought experiment > [@Stoid](#): > > Per **Bricker** ’s very fun suggestion based on my challenge > [@mhendo](#): > > I admit that i’m not an expert on every single story that has emerged about this case, but i’m having trouble seeing how the whole map thing is going to substantially swing the issue in the direction that you suggest. Maybe it won’t. But a pretty good number of people here and “out there” have identified several ways in which it easily could. But that’s what this is for, so we’ll see. ---
**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 23, 2012, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/106 "2012-04-23T20:20:08Z")
How did doing so well on the stand work out for you? ---
**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 23, 2012, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/107 "2012-04-23T20:50:51Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > How did doing so well on the stand work out for you? … > [@Stoid](#): > > (not that it mattered in the big picture…) ---
**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 23, 2012, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/108 "2012-04-23T21:37:23Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Maybe it won’t. But a pretty good number of people here and “out there” have identified several ways in which it easily could. But that’s what this is for, so we’ll see. Yeah, a large volume of blathering on the internet working from third hand info. I can’t believe that you don’t see how useless this fake court room is when one half is a legally illiterate prosecutor and the other is a defense that will “fill in the blanks with a scenario [he] create[s]”. I mean, I know arguing is fun but don’t pretend this is going to shed a single photon on the reality of the Zimmerman trial. ---
**Author:** ![GrandWino](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grandwino/32/67_2.png) [@GrandWino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrandWino)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2012, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/109 "2012-04-23T21:48:32Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Yeah, a large volume of blathering on the internet working from third hand info. I can’t believe that you don’t see how useless this fake court room is when one half is a legally illiterate prosecutor and the other is a defense that will “fill in the blanks with a scenario [he] create[s]”. > > I mean, I know arguing is fun but don’t pretend this is going to shed a single photon on the reality of the Zimmerman trial. Aha, but did you take into account all of the italics, underlining, and bolding that will be used on this? Still think it’s a useless exercise? Case Closed! ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2012, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/110 "2012-04-23T21:48:54Z")
> [@Nzinga\_Seated](#): > > **Throws molotov cocktail through Foot Locker. Runs off with 6 boxes of sneakers.** > > Power to the people! We the jury find **Nzinga, Seated** GUILTY!!! of being selfish. She had plenty of time to steal sneakers for everyone on the jury stand. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/111 "2012-04-24T00:09:15Z")
Your honor, I object to this entire line of questioning. The witness is not on trial here! \*blinks. \*stares blankly at the silence. Ah, so he is. Objection, withdrawn. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/112 "2012-04-24T00:44:49Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Why would you assume the first thing talked about is “the key part of the case”. I wouldn’t. > [@](#): > > This thing is only just beginning, how on earth can you conclude that anything is the key part of the case at this early juncture. I did not draw such a conclusion. Please respond to what I actually said, not what you imagine or wish that I said. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/113 "2012-04-24T00:49:14Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Actully I don’t, I’m just being thorough in probing all the aspects that people are talking about. If you say so, but it strikes me as an odd coincidence that your badgering was focused on the one of the main issues in this country which the Left obsesses over – race. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/114 "2012-04-24T00:50:11Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > No reason at all. But what’s fascinating is that she and you apparently consider it a key part of the case, perhaps the key part of the case. Right there dude. You seriously forget saying that? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/115 "2012-04-24T01:20:26Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Right there dude. You seriously forget saying that? Not at all. Do you understand the difference between “a key part of the case” and “the key part of the case”? Do you understand what the word “perhaps” means? Do you understand that “Perhaps X is true” does not mean the same thing as “I conclude that X is true”? Seriously, do you understand these things? ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/116 "2012-04-24T01:48:08Z")
Wow, overreact to semantics much? You made a premature claim about the “key part of the case” based on hearing only a handful of questions. No matter how I phrased my questions. Alright, so what makes you think that the first few questions asked = a key part/perhaps the key part of the case. What does your statement mean then? Does that apply to “Can you state your name?” too? That must be really key because its the first question asked usually right? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/117 "2012-04-24T02:16:19Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Wow, overreact to semantics much? I have no idea what this question means. You misstated my position. Kindly apologize. > [@](#): > > Alright, so what makes you think that the first few questions asked = a key part/perhaps the key part of the case. > > Does that apply to “Can you state your name?” too? That must be really key because its the first question asked usually right? Possibly, if she had asked the same question repeatedly in hopes of getting a desired answer. (By the way, we are talking about what you and **Stoid** consider to be “key,” not necessarily what I see as important.) Anyway, you yourself stated (in essence) that **Stoid** was trying to establish “a key part of the case” by repeatedly asking about the reasons for Zimmerman’s suspicion. So it would seem that according to you, the possibility of Zimmerman engaging in racial profiling is a “key” part of the case. Agreed? ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/118 "2012-04-24T02:20:13Z")
You insulted my intelligence and I should apologize to you? wow. I said that it was in the affidavit, therefore why wouldn’t it be asked about. What is unreasonable about that? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/119 "2012-04-24T03:06:53Z")
So far the lines of questioning actually remind me of walking slowly in the rain: depressing, boring, and not in a hurry to get anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2012, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561/120 "2012-04-24T03:15:26Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So far the lines of questioning actually remind me of walking slowly in the rain: depressing, boring, and not in a hurry to get anywhere. [I’m a-walking in the rain](http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x85xpi_del-shannon-runaway_music) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-stoid-the-prosecutor-cross-examines-bricker-george-zimmerman/619561.md?page=7)