Zimmerman Trial

#801
#801
bamawriter said:
LCA,

You might be correct about West slow-walking the end of the day to put off Martin's mother's testimony. But West has had a bad habit of going over the same ground throughout the trial.

As for SYG, I could not disagree with you more. Just because the Prosecution introduces the information doesn't mean you have to refute it as if it applies when it doesn't. Just make the point that it doesn't apply and move on. By refuting it, you give the jury cause to think it might apply. And again, West ultimately pointed out that SYG was irrelevant in this case. Which makes his entire line of questioning up to that point so baffling.
Click to expand...

But if his entire point is to "waste" time, wouldn't what he did be correct?
 
#802
#802
With bamawriter on this one. The defense has been pretty good to this point, just a few questionable moments that are being brought up.
 
#803
#803
82_VOL_83 said:
But if his entire point is to "waste" time, wouldn't what he did be correct?
Click to expand...

Wasting time is fine. But if you are going to argue that something is irrelevant, you cannot discuss it as if it's relevant. Move on and waste time on something else.
 
#804
#804
Just because stand your ground is irrelevant doesn't mean you don't ask that witness about it. In fact, you would be a fool not too. In trials, the judge is the one who gives the law. In fact it is almost unheard of for anyone but the judge to inform the jurors of the law. But thanks to the prosecutors opening the door, the defense and a JAG attorney/previous professor got to conduct a short lesson on the law of self-defense for the jurors. West got him to say that injury to Zimmerman doesn't matter when considering whether he was justified in defending himself - heck he even threw a little joke out there and said that in fact he wouldn't recommend waiting until substantially injured before using deadly force. This testimony guts the State's argument that because Zimmerman didn't suffer a certain amount of injury then he shouldn't be allowed to claim self-defense. It don't get no better then that fellas!

I mean there is always going to be mistakes, but part of the way West conducts his questioning is on purpose. Not to say, I think he has been perfect, but you all are being way too harsh. If you want to criticize, look at the State prosecutors because they have done some things that have been baffling to me.
 
Last edited:
#805
#805
I agree that the State has simply been flinging crap against the wall.

But you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree on West. He seems to have a good strategy, but I'm underwhelmed by his cross-examination. O'Mara is the guy I'd want handling that if I were on trial.
 
#807
#807
bamawriter said:
I agree that the State has simply been flinging crap against the wall.

But you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree on West. He seems to have a good strategy, but I'm underwhelmed by his cross-examination. O'Mara is the guy I'd want handling that if I were on trial.
Click to expand...

I'm by no means saying I think West is some master cross-examiner, I just think you and others are too harsh without considering possible reasons for asking the way he does. I will agree that I think he tends to get off track, but I can't tell if he does it on purpose sometimes or if he literally just loses track. I do think O'Mara has been more effective with his cross-examinations though. I also like the way O'Mara seems to always stay cool and collected.
 
#808
#808
Vol4LifeLCA said:
Yall are failing to take 2 HUGE things in consideration when you criticize the defense attorneys approach to this case: 1) the Rules of Evidence and 2) Trial Strategy.

Second, with regards to the Rules of Evidence, the Defense can't just ask anything and everything on cross-examination. They are limited by the scope of the State's direct.
Click to expand...

I did not watch the whole day so i aint sure about that tactic but i would have a hard time playing dumbazz like the prosecutors. Limited scope of cross is a federal thang not a state thang - at least In Tennessee.
 
#809
#809
Professor Nono said:
I did not watch the whole day so i aint sure about that tactic but i would have a hard time playing dumbazz like the prosecutors. Limited scope of cross is a federal thang not a state thang - at least In Tennessee.
Click to expand...

True in TN it is wide open on cross, but not true for FL unfortunately.
 
#811
#811
82_VOL_83 said:
Really the only thing I took exception too was his degrading/mocking BigPapa's kids (I think that was the one). Like I said, there isn't really anything that you can say to me to piss me off to the point of dropping the gloves. However, talking about someone's family (in particular their kids) will send me right over the edge.
Click to expand...

And, funnily enough, your kids are going to end up sucking even worse than BPV's if they end up anything like their old man. "I don't always get really pissed off, but when you talk about my kids, that TOTALLY sends me over the edge."

Meh.
 
#812
#812
notabed22 said:
And, funnily enough, your kids are going to end up sucking even worse than BPV's if they end up anything like their old man. "I don't always get really pissed off, but when you talk about my kids, that TOTALLY sends me over the edge."

Meh.
Click to expand...

Nice troll, too bad you are so transparent doing it.

Pfft back at you.
 
#813
#813
82_VOL_83 said:
Nice troll, too bad you are so transparent doing it.

Pfft back at you.
Click to expand...

If you think it's trolling for me to suggest that your children won't be nearly as impressive as mine due to being raised by someone with your values/mindset/attributes then, well, you're just really underestimating my narcissism.
 
#814
#814
notabed22 said:
If you think it's trolling for me to suggest that your children won't be nearly as impressive as mine due to being raised by someone with your values/mindset/attributes then, well, you're just really underestimating my narcissism.
Click to expand...

Lol. You think a chick will procreate with you?

Butch please
 
#815
#815
notabed22 said:
If you think it's trolling for me to suggest that your children won't be nearly as impressive as mine due to being raised by someone with your values/mindset/attributes then, well, you're just really underestimating my narcissism.
Click to expand...

I see your kids spending their early teenage years downing pain pills and cheap liquor until either their livers, kidneys, or stomach lining give way to their disdain for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#822
#822
notabed22 said:
If you think it's trolling for me to suggest that your children won't be nearly as impressive as mine due to being raised by someone with your values/mindset/attributes then, well, you're just really underestimating my narcissism.
Click to expand...

Oh no, I have in no way under estimated your narcissism. But that's the kicker, it is your narcissism. I dare say no one else's opine of you could hold a candle to your opine of yourself. You are the pure definition of a troll.
 
#823
#823
DinkinFlicka said:
I see your kids spending their early teenage years downing pain pills and cheap liquor until either their livers, kidneys, or stomach lining give way to their disdain for you.
Click to expand...

And tipping the doorman, you keep forgetting the doorman......and therapy, lots and lots of therapy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#825
#825
I would be more lively, but I'm with my buddies from work in Lost Creek Wilderness shooting at beer bottles we've emptied, patiently waiting for Antelope to wander into our bigass clearing.

Google it. It's so beautiful out here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top