AFAIU (I am sure lawyers will correct me if I am wrong) the prosecution is obligated to provide all the exculpatory evidence to the defense. Not inculpatory (damning, guilt-proving) evidence.
Apart from which, there is evidence that defense may have but you (public) do not know about. Phone records - texts, phone numbers called, times when called, etc - have been sealed, both on Martin and Zimmerman cell phones. That is, the prosecution/defense may have them, but they have not been published under the sunshine laws.
This. And I don’t think the defense is obligated to release information so if there is something damning on the table they aren’t going to release it to the court of public opinion. So there very well may be something that radically changes what we know but I was under the impression they had to mention it in some form when constructing the indictment.
It is possible that Zimmerman dragged Martin from his house toward his car or some variant thereof but there is no evidence of this and Dee Dee’s account has Martin starting the confrontation verbally. All we know is that Martin places himself at his house and Zimmerman says he’s on the sidewalk and the confrontation starts near the top of the T. From a witness point of view the verbal exchange starts in this vicinity and stays in this vicinity.
In NJ, the general rule regarding discovery is 4:10-2 which states in part
So pretty much anything that isn’t completely capricious is going to be permitted. This was something that always fucked with my head in depositions since a) I usually had no fucking idea what was going on and b) even if I did, the rule is so broad (and there’s about another 30 pages of it with annotations) that I was still double fucked.
Anyway, for criminal matters, there are additional considerations contained in Rule 3:13-3. For the question at hand, the relevant parts seem to be (d) which lists what is NOT subject to discovery and (f) which indicates that the duty to provide discovery is ongoing.
Yes it’s possible. The prosecution and defense both agreed to keep Zimmerman’s phone records and emails sealed from the public, so there’s evidence that we haven’t seen that the lawyers have.
This is certainly going to come into trial, since there still isn’t any evidence to contradict it, from the April 20, 2012 hearing:
OMara: Do you know who started the fight?
Gilbreath; Do I know?
OMara: Right.
Gilbreath: No.
Later in the hearing:
My question was, do you have any evidence to contradict or that conflicts with his contention given before he knew any evidence that would conflict with the fact he stated I walked back to my car?
Channel 9 In Orlando will be carrying the trial live and local lawyer Bill Sheaffer will be offering commentary. They did a very good job with the Casey Anthony coverage last summer.
Someone was wrong again. The SP taped out Trayvon’s body at 6 feet 3 inches. At the beginning of the altercation, George Zimmerman had hit the pound and star button, and it was recorded on his cellphone. Since he claimed he was reaching for his cellphone before the punch, this is significant.
So prosecution has finished with their opening statement. Is there any indication at all that they have anything more damning than what has been released to public already?
It does nothing. He hit it by accident, while reaching for the phone. What it does show, though, is that he was not lying when he said he reached for the phone.
Wow - defense’s opening statement is just awful. I thought the State’s opening statement was perhaps overly dramatic, but there was a clear focus; West’s statement is rambling, fumbling, unorganized, doesn’t seem that he can remember the names of some of the participants etc.
And I already see at least two points from the Defense’s opening statement that the prosecution can clearly prove to be completely wrong.
So far, therfe’s two important statements here. DD admitted in the last deposition that Trayvon decided to confront George. If true, a case killer. And an eyewitness saw Trayvon mount George.
Defense says that George had to get out of his car because the dispatch asked him ‘which way is the guy running’. But we know what’s false, because George knows as he’s getting out of his car exactly which way Martin ran - he says he’s running towards the back entrance.
Defense says that the area where George says he first saw Martin was not an area where people would normally be - yet it’s a well-known cut-through spot into the compound (was shown on local news footage, I believe George even mentions this in an earlier 911 call).
Defense has committed itself to defending George’s positioning during the phone call (‘at this point in the call, he’s here’ etc ). It’s going to bite them in the ass, because there’s no way for Martin to do his ‘run away, come back, circle George’s car, then gangsta-skip away again’ in the time frame given. It’s simply impossible.
Was very interested that the state’s opening statement touched on practically every single inconsistency in George’s testimony that I have mentioned in the other thread. Also thought it interesting that the start & end times for the NEN call was exactly as I said it was based on the NEN record. Hi Joel Upchurch!
Knock, knock.
Who’s there?
George Zimmerman.
George Zimmerman who?
Alright, good, you’re on the jury.
Like many Americans, I have a problem with the way our justice system seemingly equates knowledge of a case with partiality when it comes to jury selection. But starting off your defense in a criminal trial by bringing that up seems to me to be both inappropriate and pretty lamebrained.
(If he apologizes to anyone, though, it should be George Zimmerman, for having started off his defense in such an idiotic manner.)
I’m curious about DNA evidence. The prosecution argues that there’s no way Martin went for Zimmerman’s gun because none of Martin’s DNA was found on the gun or the holster. Is that how DNA works? If I just touch something does enough of my DNA magically stick to it for identification purposes? And admitting that Martin went back to confront Zimmerman does kind of help the defense I think.