I know who Serino is. I think you missed my point. If you don’t believe me, ask Bricker: What that investigator testified to personally was not necessarily the entire knowledge known to the prosecution. Do you really believe the prosecution did not have knowledge of that medical report prior to filing the charges?
You need to actually listen to the interview. Her first statement was that she said she said she couldn’t tell if it was Trayvon. if was only after Bernie de la Rionda prompted her several times that she said it was Trayvon. This was after saying that she didn’t hear anything earlier.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/us/new-details-are-released-in-shooting-of-teenager.html?_r=3
It is the first play button on the left.
I suspect de la Rionda is dreading putting her on the stand.
But Z can’t claim just any old thing can he?
Can Z claim that he shot M because M was threatening Z with a living extraterrestrial ninja weapon that was whisked away from the scene just before the PD arrived by extraterrestrial ninjas and thereby force the prosecution to try and prove that this is just not so?
Or is there some bar to which Z’s case must rise to be valid to establish his self-defense claim?
If there is some bar, isn’t that a case of the defense bearing a burden of proof of some sort?
God help this country if “I am begging you” from Martin minutes before he was shot engenders more skepticism than the idea that Zimmerman did nothing illegal that night.
There’s around a 90s - 120s gap iirc.
In that scenario, wouldn’t the evidence be that Z admitted to killing M and that’s that?
How do we get the evidence of Z assertions about it being self defense into the trial if the defense doesn’t mount a defense?
Bricker has said that the prosecution doesn’t show all it’s cards in that hearing. Understood. That’s not the same thing as saying explicitly that they have no knowledge of something.
It would seem that way.
You’ll note that the prosecution did not interview GZ as part of their investigation either.
The prosecution was out to indict GZ. As soon as they had something they could go to court with (presumably some inconsistencies in his testimony) they were there. Any evidence in his favor was just an obstacle to overcome, and wasn’t relevant to their decision to indict.
I don’t think you have a good grasp of the timeline.
Here’s a minute by minute timeline that seem accurate enough based upon skimming it.
Minute-by-Minute Timeline of Trayvon Martin’s Death | The View From LL2
Yeah, I asked that question a couple of pages ago, and no one wanted to take a swing at it.
If GZ wants to claim self defense, they are going to have to put him on the stand to explain why, and be subjected to cross examination by the prosecution.
He doesn’t need much suss. I just downloaded all his tweets and he didn’t every use the word beg or anything with beg in it.
Frankly it doesn’t even make sense that Martin would say that 45 seconds before the shot. Saying ‘stop’ right before the shot actually makes sense. I can’t hear the word stop, but it would make sense in context.
I have a feeling that him being called to the witness stand and having to explain himself in front of a judge and jury would be satisfying enough for Martin’s parents. Not knowing the prosecution’s cards, I’m having a hard time envisioning their strategy. But I’m guessing they’ve got an uphill battle regardless. If they lose this thing, at least Zimmerman will pay the price of being hot under the collar for a little while. I don’t think anyone should be granted immunity when there’s so much mystery involved and the circumstances are such as they are.
I also do not see how he can will be able to mount a defense without putting himself on the stand, which I’m guessing would be a scary thing for him to do. Maybe a lawyer can shed some light on this.
I don’t think I’ve ever used the word “douche-bag” in any of my Tweets, but I still know what the word means. Chrissakes, this is ridiculous. He was a fully sentient human being you know. “I’m begging you,” is not some high-falutin’ turn of phrase that only people familiar with P G Wodehouse novels would ever use under stress.
Oh no … he’s black and used the word “NIGGA” in the mean streets of Facebook, he would never speak real English, I suppose.
If you were to download all the tweets I’ve ever made, you wouldn’t find a single one that says “This is literally the dumbest thing I’ve ever read in 12 years on the SDMB.”
In fact, it is likely that none of my tweets ever contained the word “dumbest”. Nor, for that matter, “literally”.
And yet, here I am, saying it. Why, it’s almost as if people’s tweets don’t contain every possible thing they might ever say.
I missed this, somehow.
I’m not sure what you are trying to say with this.
There is nothing in Zimmerman’s call to dispatch which contradicts what she says, and there’s nothing in what she says which contradicts any of the other evidence, apart from Zimmerman’s statement. Even if for some reason you are disinclined to believe her statement about what she heard, you can not possibly deny that she was still on the phone with Martin at 7:16, when Zimmerman asserts that Martin began his unprovoked assault. This, on its own, casts doubt on Zimmerman’s story.
As for her statement about what she heard, yes, ultimately you’re going to have to decide whose account of events is more plausible, and which one fits best with the other facts in evidence. If you are disinclined to believe hers over Zimmerman’s, I’d be very interested in hearing your reasoning.
I just did a search on the exact phase, “theory of relativity” and got 4 million hits.
“don’t shoot me” got 1.4 million.
“don’t hurt me” got 1.9 million.
“stop or my mom will shoot” is about the same same at 266,000.
What is this supposed to mean? “Stop or my mom will shoot” is the name of a movie. These are all common phrases and a movie title. What’s the comparison here? Why wouldn’t a movie title have a good number of hits, and what does it have to do with these other common phrases? I have no idea what you are trying to say here.
Who’s to say that Martin hauled off and attacked Zimmerman without provocation? Ask yourself this: Who has the violent past? Who was booked on charges for beating women? Who killed a guy and didn’t bother calling for an ambulance? It wasn’t Trayvon Martin. It seems more plausible that Zimmerman attempted to restrain Martin and was unsuccessful. It’s interesting to me that Florida spends taxpayer dollars to pay for drug testing of welfare recipients and even goes as far as dissolving constitutional rights to vote for released felons, but have no rule nor law preventing a non-law enforcement official to go around playing Matlock with a loaded gun without police supervision.
IMO, neighborhood watchman should do just what the name implies: watch and observe. Soon as Zimmerman stepped out of his car with his gun against the advice of the operator, was when he initiated the conflict. If Zimmerman had stayed in his car or had minimal training in self-defense, none of this would have likely happened.
- Honesty
Point of order. Matlock was an old lawyer, popular with our more senior of citizens. Zimmerman was playing more of a Starskey. Perhaps a Hutch.
Yeah. I’m the one playing Matlock with the Marti/Zimmerman case.
GOML!
That doesn’t make sense. You say they had his statements to see the inconsistencies, so why wouldn’t they have whatever else the Sanford PD had on file, including the medical report? You think they said, “Just give us his statements, we don’t care about anything else”?
And as far as the investigator, he didn’t say “we” don’t know, he said “I” don’t know. I’m pretty sure that’s allowable - maybe a lawyer reading this can answer?