Did GZ make the RIGHT decision to give all the interviews and allow all the videos?

[joko104]

While nearly everyone declared GZ an idiot for going so public over and over, I was praising it as a brilliant tactic. Plus complaining of everyone declaring once a person is accused of a crime that person should totally abandon free speech rights.

The videos of him with the police, on Hannity, etc all allowed him to make his self defense claim - without ever subjecting himself to having to take the stand and to cross examination. Those interviews and videos was GZ making his defense to the jury without ever taking the stand. Rather than answering to the adverse prosecutor, he was answering questions by the ultra-support Sean Hannity instead. Plus raised hundreds of thousands for his defense and living expenses.

Brilliant? His refusal to be muzzled worked? Dumb luck?

This may spark entire new pre-trial defense strategies.

What do you think?

 

[buck]

Re: Did GZ make the RIGHT decision to give all the interviews and allow all the video

Before the verdict, I would have said no... But he was able to get his entire story out without ever having to get on the stand and face the prosecutor's cross.

having said that, I will never talk to the police without a lawyer present, no matter how innocent I feel I am.

 

[joko104]

Re: Did GZ make the RIGHT decision to give all the interviews and allow all the video

I don't agree. It isn't that simple.

It is NOT always wise to force police or a DA to make a decision in silence. For example, if your justification is "self defense" and you keep silent, with it fact you killed someone, the police/DA has no choice but to take you to trial - obviously. And if you then also remain silent in trial (don't testify) you will be found guilty as no self defense was ever presented.

What happened in the GZ case is revealing. He presented his self-defense case including himself telling what happened, without ever subjecting himself to cross-examination - and limiting is statement to a controlled time limit and to questions by either a favorable questioner (Hannity) or a neutral person (police officer).

How would this be different for you if you shot someone in self defense and there no witnesses?

 

[MaggieD]

Re: Did GZ make the RIGHT decision to give all the interviews and allow all the video

While nearly everyone declared GZ an idiot for going so public over and over, I was praising it as a brilliant tactic. Plus complaining of everyone declaring once a person is accused of a crime that person should totally abandon free speech rights.

The videos of him with the police, on Hannity, etc all allowed him to make his self defense claim - without ever subjecting himself to having to take the stand and to cross examination. Those interviews and videos was GZ making his defense to the jury without ever taking the stand. Rather than answering to the adverse prosecutor, he was answering questions by the ultra-support Sean Hannity instead. Plus raised hundreds of thousands for his defense and living expenses.

Brilliant? His refusal to be muzzled worked? Dumb luck?

This may spark entire new pre-trial defense strategies.

What do you think?

I think if you're telling the truth? You don't have to have a good memory.

Zimmerman was telling the truth. It was brilliant. I didn't appreciate it until I realized there was absolutely no reason for Zimmerman to take the stand. He'd already told his story many times over. That's why his attorneys make the big bucks.