- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 66,440
- Reaction score
- 47,479
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
... judge today ruled that prosecutors may not put on the witness stand two state audio experts who say the voice heard screaming in the background of a 911 call was someone other than Zimmerman.
George Zimmerman 911 screams experts ruling - OrlandoSentinel.com
defense team won another round
pretty good for a divorce attorney, eh sharon
Which side is the judge working for?
We were assured there was no possibility of this happening.
For the prosecution. She just knew this wouldn't withstand review, so had no choice.Which side is the judge working for?
Common sense.
Oh, Freddie Leatherhead and his gang are so concerned that West is losing it.
Oh, Freddie Leatherhead and his gang are so concerned that West is losing it.
:lamoAcceptance: "...people here have made some valid points. The main thing is the tape is IN, the jury WILL hear those screams, and common sense and other evidence will tell them who is screaming! They will still hear Trayvon’s cries!"
For the prosecution. She just knew this wouldn't withstand review, so had no choice.
Local Attorney commentary says she rarely rules in favor of the Defense unless they are on point.
:lamo
That is Denial disguised as acceptance.
I don't see how any jury will be able to ascertain that the screams on the 911 tape are from Martin unless the prosecution manages to portray Martin as some kind of Erkel or Ru Paul clone - the scream sounds almost feminine to me - because of that, it sounds more like a high-pitched latino voice to me, more like Zimmerman's.
I think anyone can figure out that the guy all bloodied and beat up was screaming...
...particularly as there are 2 witnesses who say that the guy in red (that's Zimmerman) was on the bottom screaming. That is surely not nuclear science.
13 year old said "I saw a man on the ground, needing help and screaming.
There are no witnesses who identify Zimmerman as the screamer. At least not reliably. The closest thing you have is Witness 11 who apparently assumed it was Zimmerman even though a) she didn't see the altercation, and b) admits she couldn't recognize his voice.
So I guess what the jury will hear in reference to those screams from the defense, will be Zimmerman claiming it was him...
witnesses that say it was Z
and the police who say in interviews and in their reports it was Z
... For the prosecution, nada, zip, zero, nothing...
Unless of course they want to bring Martin's family in, but if they do that, then the father saying that it was not Trayvon to that reporter comes in...
It's going to be tough to overcome this:
That's right... That's Martin's father telling the police that was NOT his son's voice screaming on the 911 tape. But hey, when people want a certain outcome rather than the truth, hope and illusion often find a way of creeping in.
That's quite a coup. An accused murderer making a self-serving statement. I don't see how any jury would ever disbelieve something like that.
No, they don't. Or at least not in a manner reliable enough to survive 10 seconds under cross-examination.
The police weren't there. So by what methodology would they be able to accurately determine the identity of the screamer?
The prosecution definitely lost a piece of evidence with this ruling, but so did the defense.
And the prosecution can also bring in Zimmerman's inability to recognize what was supposedly his own voice while listening to the 911 call during his interview with Serino.
It ultimately doesn't amount too much. One side will claim it was Zimmerman, the other side will claim it was Martin. Neither side will be able to prove it.
If somebody was going to shoot me, I wouldn't stand there screaming, I'd turn around and run. Maybe dodge to the side, something.
Particularly in this sort of case where it's obvious that Trayvon would be physically able to control the situation, i.e. Zman wouldn't have been able to stop him from running because of the size and physical ability difference.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?