Judge will allow past Zimmerman calls to police as evidence in murder trial

[onehandle]

Source: Fox News

Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial will hear about nearly 50 calls the defendant made to police prior to his fatal confrontation with Florida teen Trayvon Martin, evidence the prosecution believes will show the defendant was a neighborhood busybody who often eyed strangers with suspicion.

Zimmerman, 29, called the police close to 50 times over an eight-year period to report such things as slow vehicles, loitering strangers in the neighborhood and open garages. Judge Debra Nelson ruled Wednesday to allow the prosecution to introduce recordings of five of those calls.

The prosecution argues the calls are indicative of Zimmerman's overzealousness in pursuing people he considered to be suspicious -- and of his state of mind on the night he shot the unarmed teen.

The recordings show Zimmerman's "ill will," prosecutor Richard Mantei said. "It shows the context in which the defendant sought out his encounter with Trayvon Martin," he said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/26/judge-in-trayvon-martin-case-weighs-police-calls

---

Good.

Apologies for the Fox News link.

[hack89]

1. This could be good for Zimmerman

if the phone calls show that he was calm, meticulous, and never indulged in racial profiling.

So far the prosecution is not doing well - several of their witnesses have helped Zimmerman.

[naaman fletcher]

3. I agree

Saying he was a busybody neighborhood watchmen and called all the time goes directly against the "he freaked out over a single kid walking down the street and decided to stalk and kill him"

[Tommy_Carcetti]

9. "These assholes always get away", "Fucking punks."

That establishes an onus for Zimmerman to want to get out of the car and follow Trayvon on the night in question.

Not sure how past 911 calls would help Zimmerman. At best, they wouldn't hurt. At worst, they show a man obsessed with crime in his neighborhood.

[hack89]

11. If they show that his past demeanor was calm and professional

then it becomes harder to paint him as an out of control vigilant.

All those incidents with no sign of violence or racial profiling does not help the prosecution.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

12. "Fucking punks" and "These assholes always get away" is calm and professional?

Does he have to be screaming it at the top of his lungs in order for it to be considered a cloud of judgment?

Those are Zimmerman's words on the night of the shooting. Recorded. Undisputed.

[hack89]

15. When the jury only had one tape to listen to, you might be right. Now they have 50 tapes

the prosecution has to convince the jury that that one tape tells more about George Zimmerman than the other 50.

The prosecution diluted their argument - they gave the jury 50 reasons to doubt their story.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

20. You don't see the Feb. 26th 911 call as Zimmerman's breaking point?

I don't know if you heard the prior 911 calls, but I did hear them being reviewed in the court outside the jury's presence.

Almost everyone has Zimmerman saying, "We've had a lot of break ins in our neighborhood." Almost every single one.

And most of them, I believe, involved young black males.

So Zimmerman appears frustrated at break ins in the neighborhood, and he keeps on calling in on them. And according to Zimmerman, they haven't been stopping.

So one night he sees a young black male walking alone in the rain through the neighborhood. He's walking slow, so according to Zimmerman, "He looks like he's up to no good" and "looks like he's on drugs." (No other markers of possible criminal activity were noted by Zimmerman that night.)

He then says, "These assholes, they always get away."

When Zimmerman says Martin starts running, he exits the car and apparently begins to chase or follow him.

He then says, "Fucking punks."

I don't see how the prosecution diluted their argument by bringing in the prior 911 calls. I see it as building their case of Zimmerman's breaking point that night.

[hack89]

23. Evidence is a two edged sword

the defense seems very good at turning the state's evidence and witness into positive things for Zimmerman. I am not impressed by the prosecutors.

Here is an interesting legal analysis of the day 2 state witnesses - the writer calls it a "debacle" for the state.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-trial-day-2-analysis-of-states-witnesses/

[dpibel]

66. Right-wing source

I generally treat those with suspicion, even if it's supposedly dispassionate legal analysis.

Interesting that his specialty is securities law and there's no mention in his bio of any experience with criminal trial practice. That pretty much makes him an educated amateur for purposes of analyzing how this trial's going.

[hack89]

68. The witnesses said what they said.

time will tell.

[magical thyme]

89. If you actually read the OP, you'd know they will hear 5 of those tapes, not 50.

Depends to a degree on how he sounds on those calls, but even calm and professional can be damaging. 50 calls about garage doors open, loitering, etc? So a person can't even have their garage door open while they're doing yard work or cleaning their garage, without the neighborhood watch calling 9/11 on them? Seriously?

[hack89]

90. "Jurors in the George Zimmerman murder trial will hear about nearly 50 calls ..."

50 calls on 5 tapes?

[magical thyme]

92. they will hear something *about* the nearly 50 calls, not "hear 50 calls"

"Judge Debra Nelson ruled Wednesday to allow the prosecution to introduce recordings of five of those calls."

The prosecution will probably describe the number (nearly 50), the types of complaints (x # about loitering, y # about garage door open, etc), a pattern that emerges (x number of the nearly 50 calls were about young black males "loitering." But will only actually play 5 of them.

It doesn't clarify whether the judge selected the 5, or will allow the prosecution to select which calls.

[hack89]

94. OK

I don't see this as a big deal.

[magical thyme]

102. when I took karate, we learned not to go for the knockout punch

(which is essentially why OJ walked. the knockout punch missed) but go for the death of a thousand cuts. This is potentially a decent cut, or 5.

They have him as the local busybody crackpot calling the police every time a garage door was left open or someone was "loitering," (and possibly with a pattern of calling about young black men, which would suggest profiling).
They have the watch person saying they were instructed not to follow or investigate or engage, but to observe and report.
He declined joining the C.O.P.S., but that would have left him without his gun and possibly with more rigorous oversight.
They have the 9/11 dispatcher saying he didn't need to follow.
They have him on tape admitting he didn't wait at the place where he said he would meet the police.
They have him on tape admitting he followed.
They have him on tape contradicting himself.

It is still very early to see the specifics of story they are building. I am more concerned about the jury.

And the defense must prove he had no reasonable escape route, when his easiest escape was to not follow and not engage to start with.

[Adsos Letter]

125. Can the defense call for more of the tapes, now that the judge has ok'd an initial number?

If the prosecution uses 5 tapes that are damning when listened to as a defined group, can the defense ask the court to allow admission of the rest of the tapes, to water down the effect by placing them in their larger context of all of Zimmerman's calls to police?

It could make them appear as aberrant, rather than definitive.

[hack89]

131. I think they could. nt

[Wait Wut]

17. I guess it depends on how it's perceived.

If I was a juror, I wouldn't see 50 911 calls in 8 years as 'calm and professional'. I'd see it as an obsession with a wannabe cop that was itching for a chance to prove himself. In other words, a potentially volatile nut.

[hack89]

19. The prosecution undermined the "wannabe cop" argument with one of their own witnesses.

This is the testimony of Wendy Dorival, Sanford Police Department, Neighborhood Watch Program

Further, she thought it was great that Zimmerman was pursuing a degree in criminal justice. In fact, she had been so impressed with him that she had tried to recruit him for the Sanford PD’s “Citizen on Patrol” program.

It turns out that it’s a program in which the Sanford Police Department would provide Zimmerman with a civilianized patrol car and a uniform of sorts, and provide additional training that would allow him to effectively conduct patrols of his neighborhood. In contrast, the NWP program was far less pro-active, involving only observation and reporting.

Surely the Zimmerman described by the State as a “wannabe cop” seeking to “take the law into his own hands” and “profile” and “chase” unfamiliar black boys would fairly leap at such an opportunity. It was as close to being a police officer as Zimmerman was ever likely to get, the chance of a life time.

Zimmerman declined the opportunity.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-trial-day-2-analysis-of-states-witnesses/

[Tommy_Carcetti]

25. Dorival also testified that it was not NW protocol to follow suspicious persons.

Which Zimmerman did do that night.

That she saw Zimmerman as an involved citizen and thought he might be C.O.P. material, without the benefit of foresight, is not really relevant to the case and the events of February 26, 2012.

I think you really are grasping for straws when you claim that Dorival helped Zimmerman's case.

[hack89]

28. Lets look at the actual testimony

West focused in on that comment, asking, “when you say the shouldn’t follow someone, you’re not saying that if you see someone suspicious that you can’t follow at a distance to gather information, are you? You don’t tell people that they can’t follow someone from a distance, do you?”

“That’s right,” Dorival agreed, she was not saying that, but rather that it was not a good idea to engage someone

[summerschild]

35. I wonder if he purchased his gun before or after he volunteered for the watch program.

I don't know that I've ever read about that.

It would seem like if he bought it after naming himself "security", he would be looking for an opportunity to use it.

[Wait Wut]

39. Declining the opportunity...

...to be a Citizen Patrol just tells me he wanted to be a 'real' cop and that being a CP would have been too restrictive. I don't know about Florida, but most states (all??) don't allow CPs to carry weapons. He had more freedom to be a 'wannabe' cop as a citizen.

[hack89]

44. We will see what it tells the jury. nt

[Wait Wut]

47. Yeah, that concerns me.

I wasn't thrilled with the jury selection. Time will tell.

[John2]

57. It depends on

what safe guards these organizations do to check these people out. For all we know, they could have been authorizing a serial killer or rapist the authorization to monitor the neighborhood. Did applying for such a program include a background check? And if he had any record of a criminal record, wouldn't he not want to go through it? We don't know the reason he declined. It was only her bias opinion, but did she really know Zimmerman, just from a few conversations and what his motives really were? For all we know, it might have just been a good cover to stalk people, as his justification.

[hack89]

63. If those issues are not raised by the prosecution then the jury

only has what they heard in court to go by.

[Just Saying]

78. Would he have been able to carry his gun? n/t

[hack89]

81. I don't know. nt

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

116. I'm noticing the pro-Zimmerman bias of some of these bloggers from Legal Insurrection.

Many of them don't appear to be objective at all in their analysis. I know that they're bloggers, perhaps with some legal or courtroom experience, but I would take some of their "analysis" with a grain of salt. They just come across as biased.

[marshall]

133. Our judicial system is biased toward innocence

One is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Of course bloggers as well as posters are under no moral obligation to follow that, but perhaps some have law degrees or a legal background and feel constrained by their education and experience.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

134. That's a fair point. Thanks.

[1monster]

32. Fifty phone calls in eight years is 1.92 calls per month, or nearly two calls

a month.

That's a lot of calls.

[IphengeniaBlumgarten]

55. Arithmetic is wrong. More like 1 every 2 months. nt.

[1monster]

60. Show me where I went wrong. Maybe my formula is wrong.

8 * 12 = 96 (Eight years times 12 months equals 96 months)

96 / 50 = 1.92 (96 months divided by 50 calls equals 1.92 calls)

[Captain Stern]

83. You've calculated months per call

96 months, 50 calls. To get calls per month you should be dividing 50 by 96.

50/96 = .52. So, that's about 1 call every two months.

[1monster]

111. Thank you. I can be a bit backwards sometimes...

[LanternWaste]

18. As it's the prosecution who wanted to introduce this as evidence (and the defense that objected to i

As it's the prosecution who wanted to introduce this as evidence (and the defense that objected to it) one may imagine that "they are indicative of his overzealousness in pursuing people he considered to be suspicious - and of his state of mind on the night the unarmed teen was killed." (quote culled from Huff Post analysis).

All in all, one more of many, many drips falling patiently on Zimmerman.

[Ikonoklast]

101. *The* most telling bit of information, ignored by those who've never been in court.

What you fight to get admitted into testimony is what's favorable to your argument..

What you want the judge to supress is evidence that makes your client look bad.

[premium]

103. And sometimes, not often,

but sometimes it backfires badly, not saying that's the case here as we don't know yet.

Case in point, the defining moment in the OJ murder trial when the prosecution had OJ try on that glove and it clearly didn't fit, that backfired on the prosecution badly and was probably the final nail in the prosecutions case.

[Ikonoklast]

108. That prosecution team was the epitome of incompetence.

But the bungled initial investigation doomed that case from the start.

[premium]

110. Yeah, having a racist cop investigation OJ, a black man,

wasn't really the wisest thing on the LAPD's agenda, and then the DA's office putting him on the stand, incompetence at the max.
And then Barry Scheck absolutely tore the DNA evidence apart. The prosecution looked like a bunch of Keystone Kops.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

105. Exactly! Hack89's assessment makes no sense. Why would the prosecution want the evidence

considered if it's not favorable to their side?

[B Stieg]

21. I'm not so sure.

I think that while individual instances can be "counterfeited," the pattern that the pros. wants to establish goes to Z's mental state not as an "out-of-control" vigilante, but as something more targeted and sinister.

The state may be looking more to establish Zimmerman as an "opportunist" than as a wild man.

[Jesus Malverde]

38. It might also serve as an endorsement from the police,

His attorney might point to 50 phone calls as an endorsement from the police, absent any indication they asked him to stop.

[Hoyt]

73. Once he bought a gun, his demeanor changed to one of "I'll show them."

[premium]

75. So Hoyt,

did you call the FL. prosecutors office and tell them that you're an internet psychologist and tell them of your findings?
And when do you testify for the prosecution? I ask because I want to make sure I'm watching HLN that day.

[Hoyt]

82. Pre, your support of Zimmerman - including his bigotry and love of guns - is duly noted. Carry on.

[premium]

86. So Hoyt, we're back to the lie of me supporting Zimmerman?

I challenge you to find one (1), just one (1), post (comment) of mine that shows support for Zimmerman?
Or, as before, you won't take that challenge?
Come on Hoyt, put your money where integrity is.

Funny thing is, I've checked every one of my posts since I first joined and, whatta know, I can't find any, but, if I may have missed one (1), you are free to post it.
I await for you to prove what you allege.

[marshall]

99. Also it could make or break the racial profiling charge

Punks and assholes may not be considered professional (though I imagine police use that and worse in conversation with each other) but if over the course of more than 50 calls there are no racial epithets or even no reference at all to race, the defense can throw that up as evidence of no racial animus.

[TheMadMonk]

120. In which case it would be the defence wanting to use those recordings. /nt

[hack89]

121. It provides an opening for the defense

Last edited Wed Jun 26, 2013, 08:00 PM - Edit history (1)

judging by how the defense has been able to extract testimony very favorable to Zimmerman from prosecution witnesses, I suspect they can turn it to their advantage.

[yardwork]

10. Except that he did engage in racial profiling

That's why the prosecution wants the jury to hear the calls.

[hack89]

13. If all those calls don't show a pattern of racial profiling

then the prosecution has to show why this single incident shows Zimmerman's true character. The defense merely has to raise reasonable doubt in the jury's minds - "members of the jury, the prosecution has given you 50 reasons to doubt that George Zimmerman was no racist."

[yardwork]

14. The prosecution is going to play only 5 more calls

You can bet that they will help the prosecution's case.

[hack89]

16. Considering how several key prosecution witnesses have helped Zimmerman so far

I would not be so sure.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

24. I don't think any witnesses have helped Zimmerman too much.

Some have hurt more than others, but helped?

[hack89]

26. One witness undermined the "wannbe cop" argument

by testifying that Zimmerman turned down an invitation from the Sanford PD’s to join their “Citizen on Patrol” program which would provided Zimmerman with a civilianized patrol car and a uniform of sorts, and additional training that would allow him to effectively conduct patrols of his neighborhood.

Another one testified that a burglar was caught and arrested in the same neighborhood because someone followed him while calling the cops. That burglar happened to be a 17 year old black youth.

A third witness was forced to admit that she gave testimony in court that was not in any of the three written depositions she gave previously - this after admitting she reviewed her testimony with prosecutors just days before the trial.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-trial-day-2-analysis-of-states-witnesses/

[premium]

29. Yeah, that could help go to reasonable doubt

in the jury's minds, and all it takes is one juror to cause a hung jury. I'm in agreement here, so far, it sounds like the defense is holding their own, but there is still a ways to go.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

33. Again....

The "big win" on your first witness wasn't anything. All she testified that was that she invited him to join the C.O.P., which could have been nothing more her commenting on his neighborhood involvement. It wasn't akin to her giving him a psychological exam and finding him mentally and emotionally fit for the program. That same witness also testified that it was not recommended for NW volunteers to follow suspicious persons. And that somehow helps Zimmerman how???

Witness No. 2 actually gives credence to the argument that Zimmerman did profile Trayvon that night based on nothing more than his appearance. (And a huge dot dot dot, to boot.)

True, the third witness you note did testify to facts she did not previously raise. (On re-direct, she stated she was never asked about that.) At worst, she neutralized the power of her own testimony. At best for Zimmerman, it was a wash. That would be problematic for the state if she was the only resident eyewitness to testify for the state. Of course, she wasn't. The witness this morning provided some very damning facts as to what she saw and what she heard. And even more powerful was her contemporaneous 911 call. I don't know if you heard it, but she does not sound like someone who just witnessed a man save himself by shooting someone in self-defense. She sounds like (and actually says) she was a person who witnessed a man who just shot another person who was shouting for help.

[hack89]

54. Time will tell

I don't profess to have a crystal ball when it comes to juries - I thought the evidence showed that Casey Anthony and OJ were guilty.

[crim son]

42. I don't know how this trial will proceed

but I will say that the evidence you cite in this thread in support of your position, to me seems to say the exact opposite. I believe Z is guilty as hell and perhaps that's why I see things the way I do. I'm curious if you see him as guilty or not guilty, or have you no opinion?

[hack89]

49. I think he is guilty. I also thought Casey Anthony and OJ were guilty

the state has a case based on circumstantial evidence - they can't afford mistakes like this.

[crim son]

65. I see.

Well, you are quite right about the Anthony and OJ cases, and may well be right now.

[premium]

71. Well, OJ definitely was guilty,

but it took Clark County, NV. to do what L.A. couldn't do, now he's a guest of my state.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

27. Wrong. To justify use of deadly force, the Defense has to prove with a preponderance of evidence.

And even then, the state can come back and by showing that such a defense did not actually apply in the situation.

For example, if the Defendant provoked the deadly situation.

[hack89]

30. Except Florida law specifically permits the aggressor to use deadly force in certain circumstances.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.041.html

[Tommy_Carcetti]

37. And that's where Zimmerman's injuries come in.

Zimmerman claims that his head was repeatedly bashed into the concrete sidewalk by Travyon.

The medical report only mentions a bloody nose and small abrasions to the head.

The photos only show a bloody nose and small abrasions to the head.

Detective Sorino's report comments that these were not likely life threatening injuries caused by repeated blows to the head.

He hasn't testified yet but if he stays consistent, Zimmerman's self-defense claim is going to have some serious problems.

[hack89]

52. "reasonably believes"

how many times do you have to have you head smashed into the concrete before you fear for your life? That's what the jury will have to decide.

[LanternWaste]

67. If indeed it was actually "smashed" into "concrete".

If indeed it was actually "smashed" into "concrete". I imagine the jury will decide upon whether that happened as well, too.

Reasonable, indeed...

[hack89]

69. That's why we have trials and juries

to figure out these things.

[LanternWaste]

70. I imagine there are additional reason as to why we have trials and juries.

I imagine there are additional reason as to why we have trials and juries.

[hack89]

72. There are plenty, I am sure. nt

[LanternWaste]

74. I have little doubt you are... n/t

I have little doubt you are... n/t

[hack89]

76. I can't come up with a more obtuse comment - you win. nt

[LanternWaste]

84. I don't think winning or losing defines a conversation

I don't think winning or losing defines a conversation. Although I can imagine why some may think as such. I simply respond to in kind...

I neither win, nor lose. I simply exist.

[LanternWaste]

87. For us both

For us both...

[hack89]

88. I deleted my comment - decided it was too snarky.

Have a good day.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

128. That argument would make sense if Zimmerman didn't have a gun. And more important, if he

had simply not followed Trayvon as he was instructed.

[Cronus Protagonist]

130. One

But if someone hunts a teenager down with a gun in his waistband holster and then gets into a fight with his gun in play, he's at fault. He should not have been at that location at that time with a gun in his belt in any fight with any children at all. Simple as that. He didn't have to be there and he went into that situation looking for trouble.

Zimmerman meticulously and deliberately setup the boy as a mark in his earlier phone call - he ran through the shooter's checklist on "how to get off with killing someone". With that carefully in place, he hunted down and shot the child. He clearly acted as though he thought he would be able to use the law to get away with it.

And, by the way, even if the boy was an active burglar. Same conclusion. It's illegal to kill someone just because you have a gun and want to do it, and that's precisely what Zimmerman did.

[hack89]

132. The law is in black and white

the question is how the lawyers spin the story and what the jurors believe.

[LiberalAndProud]

41. You are not unbiased.

You had already decided on Zimmerman's innocence. You will see the trial in view of that mindset. Hopefully, the jurors are less biased.

[premium]

46. Pot, meet kettle.

That's funny, I've yet to see a post of Hack89's proclaiming Zimmerman's innocence, perhaps you can link to a post proving what you claim.

[LiberalAndProud]

51. Yea, he's open minded.

Not.

[premium]

53. So, IOW,

you can't provide proof of your accusation?
Oh, look:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014519189#post49

Kinda blows your accusation out of the water, doesn't it.

[hack89]

61. So why have I posted so many times that Zimmerman is guilty?

all I have pointed out is that the prosecution does not have an easy case with no actual eye witnesses to the shooting. Toss in some good defense lawyers and who knows what happens - remember criminal proceedings are biased towards the accused - Zimmerman has some legal advantages on his side - all it takes is one jury to entertain doubt and he walks free. Many here refuse to accept that he can walk free.

[John2]

36. I'm not

following you at all. Which witnesses do you think helped Zimmerman's case? They were all prosecution witnesses. I don't think the woman who claimed she saw two people fighting standing helped Zimmerman's case at all. I don't think the police officer did either or the 911 person. And how many of these people were supposedly arrested, after Zimmerman made all these calls?

There is a difference between having an obsession and normal reactions. And it also depends on the type of people Zimmerman made these calls against. I do not also think the person that gave him instructions, about what an community watch program involved. Zimmerman went beyond the guidelines. All pyschopaths donot always demonstrate violent behavior. They can appear very clever and normal to fool people.

It depends on what activities Zimmerman was calling suspicious activities. I disagree with people making the claims Martin was doing anything suspicious, when Zimmerman first made contact with Martin. Just because the 911 caller agrees walking in the rain on a certain night, does not make that suspicious because people do it all the time. even I have went to the neighborhood store in the rain, and have never been stopped. He made a claim to the 911 person, Martin looked like he was on Drugs or something. There is no evidence to it.

I don't think a witmess helped Zimmerman's case at all when she claimed that she saw two people struggling upright and then when she returned, only saw one body on the ground but nothing about seeing the other person around. That certainly doesn't help Zimmerman at all. For all we know, Zimmerman could have went somewhere and inflicted his own injuries because there is no account where he was at all times. And also given the fact, the forensic person can't account for his DNA on Martin.

[hack89]

64. Here is one lawyers analysis of the state's day in court.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-trial-day-2-analysis-of-states-witnesses/

[John2]

100. Just because this guy,

is a lawyer, doesn't mean he has no bias. I can see a certain conservative tone to his assumptions. You responded to my earlier post about somethings that may appear favorable for Zimmerman really doesn't. This Lawyer is doing nothing but spinning. His assumption was Zimmerman was doing good acts. It be seen as an obsession if you look up the definition of a psychopatn and the victims he falsely profiled.

I'm going to respond to the Florida Statute of the justifiable use of Force. Apparently Florida softened the statute. That was a political firestorm favored by conservatives in the State. I guess it made it easier for conservatives to kill people?

Now I'm going to read the Judge's words given to the Jury. Now I'm going to say, I've already found him guilty of murder regardless of any argument trying to save him. And if he walks, it will be a travesty. I would suggest young Black men carry guns because of psychopaths like Zimmerman. You never know when one will stalk you.

Judge Nelson's own mouth " The danger facing the defendant need not be actual," Nelsons instructions to jurors, " However, to justify the use of (Deadly Force), the appearance of danger must be so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of force."

Zimmerman failed the test again on the use of Deadly force for self defense. He could have avoided the situation altogether by not pursuing Martin. His own words on the 911 call incriminate him with his description of Martin. He alluded that he thought Martin might be dangerous and appeared to have something in his hands, which could have been perceived to be a weapon. On top of it, Zimmerman pursued Martin with a loaded gun on his person. What was the gun for? What was his intent to do with it? Every action he took before physically confronting Martin showed he believed Martin was dangerous and possibly armed. He's guilty of murder! There is no reasonable doubt period!

[Tommy_Carcetti]

112. Lawyers are like assholes.

Wait, you were expecting a punch line?

[premium]

114. Everyone hates lawyers

until they need one.

[JDPriestly]

97. The prosecution wants to bring this evidence in, so I would assume to the

contrary that the calls show Zimmerman as having some sort of problem -- don't want to speculate on what the problem might be.

I'm not sure why the judge is allowing so much evidence on Zimmerman's past an character, but maybe the court thinks it will help prevent an appeal based on evidentiary decisions.

Seems to me what Zimmerman did in the past in not so relevant and could damage or help him. The judge seems to be allowing a lot of it, but I could be wrong. That could be an incorrect impression I am getting from news reports. And too, it may be that the judge does not want to make a judgment call based on the content of the evidence because that could prejudice the jurors. Some of this seems relevant, but so much?

[hack89]

98. So far the prosecutions witnesses have helped Z just as much as they have hurt

so I am not so confident. The state had a bad day yesterday.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

104. Your logic makes no sense. Why would the prosecution submit these tapes if there is nothing

incriminating on them; or, if none of them shed light regarding Zimmerman's vigilantism?

And even if those calls don't show anything, the one that matters most is the one that occurred the night of Trayvon's murder!

Geez, the lengths that people go through to defend this bigot is amazing to me.

[hack89]

106. Because it opens a door for the defense

now you have 50 calls to compare instead of one. What if you have 50 calls with no racial profiling? 50 calls with no profanity, no violence? It allows the defense to paint a different picture of Zimmerman.

And lets not forget, so far several key prosecution witnesses have helped Z as much as hurt him. He appears to have good lawyers - either that or the prosecutors are mediocre.

Btw - I have consistently said he is guilty. I can still look dispassionately at the trial and what is being said.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

109. You said: What if you have 50 calls with no racial profiling? 50 calls with no profanity?

My response: I'm not sure that the prosecution is arguing that Zimmerman's actions were motivated by race. Two, if there is no profanity, a calm demeanor, I would think that jury would be more concerned about what motivated him. It's not a young man carrying a gun. It's not a young man who was caught loitering. It's not a young man who was loud or stalking the neighbors. In that case, the defense would be put on the spot, trying to explain what it was that set this "typically calm" person off. There's no evidence that Trayvon pursued him, so what did it?

By the way, I took a break from work to watch part of the trial. One witness was testifying and recounted the scene where she heard a loud, shrieking voice pleading for help, but the other voice was softer. She then testified that she heard a "pop, pop, pop" and the pleas for help stopped. To me that sounds like the aggressor was the one doing the "pop, pop, pop" and the one pleading for help was the one who got popped: Trayvon Martin.

I'm simply not seeing the flaws in the witnesses' testimonies that you are seeing.

Assuming that the prosecution heard all the tapes with the calls, I simply don't think the prosecutors are silly enough to put forth potentially exculpatory evidence re: Zimmerman's character for consideration. That job belongs to the defense. It just doesn't make sense that the prosecution would do that.

And I apologize for jumping to conclusions.

[hack89]

113. One witness undermined the "wannbe cop" argument

by testifying that Zimmerman turned down an invitation from the Sanford PD’s to join their “Citizen on Patrol” program which would provided Zimmerman with a civilianized patrol car and a uniform of sorts, and additional training that would allow him to effectively conduct patrols of his neighborhood.

That same witness testified that Travyon's behavior is exactly the type of behavior the police tell Neighborhood Watch volunteers to report.

Another one testified that a burglar was caught and arrested in the same neighborhood because someone followed him while calling the cops. That burglar happened to be a 17 year old black youth.

A third witness was forced to admit that she gave testimony in court that was not in any of the three written depositions she gave previously - this after admitting she reviewed her testimony with prosecutors just days before the trial.

That witness also admitted she signed the “prosecution of the killer of our son Trayvon Martin.” petition.

You can't tell me any of the above is good for the prosecution. And they were all prosecution witnesses.

That's what I mean by opening doors - the prosecutors are giving the defense lawyers easy opportunities to instill doubt in the minds of the jury.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

115. I was not familiar with these testimonies. As such, there's always witness testimony that gets

discarded or the judge asks the jury not to consider. I'm sure there will be bad witnesses for the defense as well. That's not unusual at all.

The one thing I do agree with you on is this: the burden of proof is on the prosecution, so it helps them to get better witnesses with quality, compelling and convincing testimony. It matters more for the prosecution than it does for the defense.

It's early in the hearings, so I'm not worried. There's more to come.

[hack89]

117. Trials take on a life of their own that sometimes defies logic

it depends so much on what the jury is allow and not allowed to see plus the skill of the lawyers.

I once sat on a jury where at the end of the trial my initial certainty was completely done away with and I found myself coming to a somewhat surprising decision. And the jury decisions were both unanimous and "surprising" to trial observers. I am absolutely certain my view from the inside of the process was radically different from theirs.

[John2]

122. Why do you,

keep ignoring the judge's instructions on the use of Deadly Force? None of the witness testimony you have listed caused reasonable doubt. Unless you really believe Zimmerman had no fault, He can't get off on Perfect Right of Self Defense. The Defense has to prove Martin attacked Zimmerman.

So far there is no such proof, Martin gave Zimmerman those injuries. Nobody saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, bashing his head on the concrete several times,except the word of Zimmerman. The Prosecution has already given evidence of DNA and the lack of it on Martin. There are collaborating witnesses claiming Zimmerman was the aggressor. He pursued Martin. The use of the Deadly weapon doctrine comes into affect. A Black male walking in the rain, is not suspicious behavior. A Black male the way Zimmerman described would be suspicious if he looked like he was on Drugs and walking in circles, coming towards him. That is Zimmerman's description. So far testimony indicates, he had no drugs, no weapon, and was running away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman killed him further from the point he saw him, and it was nearer Martin's house.

There is nothing to support Zimmerman's self defense case except his own words and how he got his injuries. The prosecution doesn't have to prove how Zimmerman got his injuries. All they have to prove, is Trayvon couldn't have given Zimmerman his injuries. The Defense has to prove that.

I'll say one thing about the physician's testimony. That testimony will be important. Have you ever had a hard knock on the head? I have several times and you know what. It does not take that hard of a hit, to make you dizzy. The way Zimmerman described Martin bashing his head, Zimmerman should have passed out. There is no way, he would have the conscious enough to shoot Martin. Martin's body was not on the side walk either. Zimmerman was also 200 pounds and Martin was only 158 pounds. I didn't see any hair on Zimmerman's head either. Martin would have big hands to grab Zimmerman's fat head.

[hack89]

123. I think Zimmerman is guilty

that doesn't mean he can't walk free if the state botches the case or the defense lawyers raise reasonable doubt.

Remember - Casey Anthony got away with murder. There are only six opinions that mean a damn - yours and mine are not one of them.

[Adsos Letter]

127. Did the witness who testified to the "pop, pop, pop" sounds equate them with shots?

I tuned in after she had begun testifying, and that point confused me.

[Bo]

138. Its only 50x in 96 mos. of patrolling in a high crime area

I don't see how the prosecutor can use this.

[warrior1]

2. I would think that this goes to motive

[freshwest]

93. It does. 'Ill will.' And that opening statement from the prosecution matches this, too.

If the jury grasps the malicious way that Z regarded those he deemed suspicious, with his language repeated in court, they may convict him, although honestly I'm not sure how many options they are being given on conviction.

Some cases give a variety of choices, with degrees of murder, manslaugher or of negligent homocide. I hope that whatever they decide, will be a verdict that people can learn from about the right to walk around 'while black.'

But even if TM was not black, something needs to be done about the mentality that having a gun, or 'might makes right' which the NRA seems to promotes.

Z would not get off with me on the jury, as he didn't have to get out of his vehicle. His later defense he was 'afraid for his life' after he started something he couldn't handle without use of his gun, doesn't wash with me. This could have all been prevented, but Z felt entitled to get out and pursue someone.

His attitude is why TM is dead, not what TM did. That's an afterthought.

Gun rights folks that have backed Z, need to think twice, as he was acting as a hot head with a gun, not a responsible gun owner. Z is the worst example of a gun owner there is, his previous violent record should have not allowed him to carry.

The man was then, and more than likely still is, unstable and unwilling to take responsibility for his own or anyone else's safety, as gun wielder should be required, just like a police officer.

He's guilty in my mind, of what level the jury picks or prosecution has asked, I don't know.

[Crowman1979]

4. This is news? The Red State Update duo already released them last year.

[crim son]

7. This isn't real, right?

The case is so bizarre I really don't know.

[Crowman1979]

118. Of course it's not real. But I'm sure the real phone calls are similar.

[crim son]

126. Quite possibly. n/t

[naaman fletcher]

8. Yes it's news

The fact that they were released to the public doesn't mean they can be used at trial.

[freshwest]

95. +1. The trial is current. The propaganda released in Z's defense doesn't mean it's not news now.

[riverwalker]

5. his embellishments and assumptions

on the calls show an active imagination (nice way to say nearly paranoid and delusional).

[politicaljunkie41910]

6. Agreed. Who made him judge and jury to decide who lives and who dies.

Martin was not threatening him and he should have continued on his way to Target or where ever he was going. And he never does explain what is suspicious of someone "walking in the rain", or with a hood over their head "in the rain", or how he appeared to be on drugs or something. This is Zimmerman's method of getting the police to respond immediately to his own paranoia. None of his behavior in the Seven Eleven indicated that he was behaving suspiciously.

On behalf of mothers across America who have black sons and husbands who are held to a standard that white America can't even imagine every time they leave their homes, I hope he is convicted.

[freshwest]

96. +100

[Skittles]

22. open garage doors?

Zimmerman is a nutcase

[Bay Boy]

31. Letting someone know that their garage door is open...

...would be a courtesy to the neighbor, just not sure why he would call the police and not tell the neighbor directly.

[onehandle]

40. Because he assumes it's a home invasion.

And he's too chickenshit to knock on the door. The perp might be armed with something more than iced tea and Skittles.

[Bay Boy]

43. Not saying you are wrong but if I were walking down the street and saw

a neighbor's garage door open I would assume it was an oversite by the homeowner and not a crime in progress. Open garage doors do make crimes of opportunity much easier.

[onehandle]

50. That's because you and I are not paranoid nuts.

Who have to cruise around with a bullet in the chamber assuming the worst.

[Babel_17]

34. I think the jury will consider the level of crime in the neighborhood

If the level of crime wasn't all that high then Zimmerman is more likely to be taken as an unusual person.

If the level of crime is seen by the jurors as having been disturbingly high then Zimmerman wanting to be active in watching his neighborhood will be more understandable.

How the case is framed by the prosecution and the defense and how the jury processes that is going to have a major impact on the verdict.

Zimmerman's credibility is going to have a huge impact on the verdict. How much slack they'll cut for the accepted principle that people's memories are fallible is going to be important. I'm no expert on this trial but I'll be amazed if Zimmerman's story can't be held up as having some important inconsistencies.

[Bay Boy]

48. That's assuming Zimmerman ever testifies...

.... what's the over/under on that?

[Babel_17]

56. I think I read that Florida law provides a goad for defendants to actively defend themselves

Sorry, I can't remember where. But either way the prosecution can quote to the jury Zimmerman's voluntary testimony to the police and they can point out any contradictions.

Edit: I am not a lawyer and I'm assuming Zimmerman's statements can be quoted to the jury.

[premium]

58. Well, Vegas ain't taking odds on that.

[XemaSab]

129. Living in a bad 'hood makes me less likely to call the cops

Unless someone's breaking into a house or getting killed, the cops have better things to do. Like keep people from breaking into houses and getting killed.

80 calls about someone loitering or an open garage door is just wasting The Man's time.

[Myrina]

45. Could also be a problem for him because of a ....

"Oh hell, these useless cops won't do anything, I gotta take this shit into my own hands" attitude.

[Tom Ripley]

59. Zimmerman is like the offspring of an unholy union of Gladys Kravitz and Travis Bickle

[onehandle]

62. 'ABNER! Get my .44 Magnum!' nt

[Ikonoklast]

107. "Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to ME???"

Poor Abner.

Probably a good thing there was no gun in that house.

[alp227]

77. Next time try these local sources instead

Orlando Sentinel
Miami Herald
Tampa Bay Times

[John2]

79. There is no reasonable doubt

Zimmerman killed a person. There is no reasonable doubt, Zimmerman used a deadly weapon. What he is claiming is self defense, and he was not at fault. Is there any doubt, Zimmerman had no fault? His first problem was identifying Martin as a suspicious person in the commission of a crime. His second fault was not following the advice, not to follow Martin. The 911 operator is not liable but Zimmerman is. Third, Zimmerman set out on foot, with a loaded weapon. So he took the risk of going after a person he thought was violent. The self defense case fails, because Zimmerman had some fault in what happened.

Nobody told him to pursue Martin with a loaded gun. All he was asked for to give directions of where the person went and a place, the officers could meet him. Was he at the address he gave the 911 operator? Even his instructions for community watch only said eyes and ears, not investigation or pursuit. That crosses the line into police work. None of that is reasonable doubt. That is all it should take to charge him with being guilty of murder. And if in Martin's own words, on that cell phone accused Zimmerman of pursuit, then it is testimony who the aggressor was. If the person he was talking to makes the claim, then it is evidence.

[LanternWaste]

80. Tow different analyses of his 911 patterns don't look very good for Zim

From Slate: http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/03/23/george_zimmerman_s_long_lonely_war_against_black_youths_doing_things.html

Adam Weinstein and Matt DeLuca have pulled the logs of 911 calls that George Zimmerman made before this year's shooting. Spot the pattern. From Weinstein: In August 2011, he called to report a black male in a tank top and shorts acting suspicious near the development's back entrance. "[Complainant] believes [subject] is involved in recent S-21s"—break-ins—"in the neighborhood," the call log states. The suspect, Zimmerman told the dispatcher, fit a recent description given out by law enforcement officers. Three days later, he called to report two black teens in the same area, for the same reason. "[Juveniles] are the subjs who have been [burglarizing] in this area," he told the dispatcher.

From DeLuca:
On April 22, 2011, Zimmerman called to report a black male about “7-9” years old, four feet tall, with a “skinny build” and short black hair. There is no indication in the police report of the reason for Zimmerman’s suspicion of the boy.

Add this to Trayvon call, when Zimmerman apparently muttered a racial slur, and you have to ask if Zimmerman had a hang-up about young black men in the gated community.



From USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/06/25/zimmerman-trial-trayvon-neighborhood-watch/2455163/

An FBI report shows Zimmerman had a pattern of calling authorities about criminal activities and safety issues in his neighborhood. In one of the calls to Sanford police, Zimmerman complained about children playing and running in the street. Four calls were about black men he said he witnessed in the neighborhood after break-ins, according to the report, release by the state attorney's office.

Assistant State Attorney Richard Mantei argued Tuesday he wants the jury to hear the calls to show that Zimmerman had a growing frustration and that in the past he had not approached people. Something changed on Feb. 26, 2012, Mantei said, and the jury should hear that Zimmerman took action in a way he never had before.

Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara said the state is trying to improperly introduce character evidence against Zimmerman. "They have nothing and they want to make a stealth argument," O'Mara said, explaining Zimmerman wasn't doing anything wrong in the calls.

[Just Saying]

91. I think one big benefit for the prosecution

Is that the jury will hear Zimmerman's voice a lot. He doesn't have a high-pitched voice IMO, and that may sway the jury about who it is screaming "help."

[Jefferson23]

119. I am happy to hear this and have been very curious about the numerous calls...speaks to his pov of

his role in this gated community which may show his overreach as an unqualified authority
figure.

K&R

[Wolf Frankula]

124. He Seems to Me to Be a Sorry Goofus

who played cop, worse played TV Cop.

Wolf

[Myrina]

135. Is there a web stream from anywhere for the trial?

My employer blocks all media on our desktops so I'm looking for a stream thru my iPhone, not having any luck.

Thanks!!

[jeepnstein]

136. wildabouttrial.com has an app.

Be warned. You will be driven nuts by what you see and hear. It's a circus.

[Myrina]

137. Thanks - I found a link thru mediaite but it must have been overloading ...

.... it keeps booting me off & I have to rebuffer. It was straight thru the website, not an app. Suck.

I'll try your link. Thanks!!