Just to recap: 32green is really a white guy and WCO is really a black guy. Got it.
Just to recap: 32green is really a white guy and WCO is really a black guy. Got it.
The question (in terms of excluding witnesses) is whether the testimony they hear will contaminate their memory of the facts. Don't know about what Z's family would testify to, but my guess is it's his conduct before and after, which is the subject of some of the other testimony - hence excluding them. (Not sure what good that does when the case is live-streamed, btw). If all Martin's mom is testifying to is recognizing his voice, there's no facts in the testimony to date that impact what she will say (since she either recognizes it or doesn't).2. Z. family was ejected from the courtrom early on, on the basis that they were witnesses who would be testifying. M. family was allowed to stay.
Now we find out that M. family will be testifying......so how does that work with the earlier ruling? Why the difference in treatement of one possible witness vs. another?
The defense will argue that she misidentified it for the reasons the expert said, and that others think it sounds like Zimmerman - but that's a fact question for the jury, not a basis to prevent her from testifying. Same with any eyewitness identification
I wonder if Zimmermans father will also testify that the screams are his son in the tape.
Trayvon Martin’s mother and brother testified Friday that they heard the unarmed teen screaming for help on 911 calls recorded during a fight he had with George Zimmerman last year before the neighborhood watch volunteer fatally shot him.
Sybrina Fulton was called to the stand after two weeks and roughly three dozen witnesses in the case. She told jurors that her 17-year-old son can be clearly heard on 911 calls recorded during a fight Martin had with Zimmerman on Feb. 26, 2012.
"I heard my son screaming."
- Sybrina Fulton
After the audio was played, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda asked Fulton, "Who do you recognize that to be?" "Trayvon Benjamin Martin," she replied.
Defense attorney Mark O'Mara suggested during cross-examination that Fulton may have been influenced by others who listened to the 911 call, including relatives and her former husband.
O'Mara also asked Fulton hypothetically whether she would have to accept it was Zimmerman yelling for help if the screams did not come from her son. O'Mara also asked if she hoped Martin didn't do anything that led to his death. "I heard my son screaming," Fulton said. "I would hope for this to never have happened and he would still be here."
Earlier Friday, Fulton posted on Twitter: "I pray that God give me the strength to properly represent my angel Trayvon." Trayvon's brother, Jahvaris Fulton, 22, also testified Friday that he recognized Trayvon's voice on the 911 calls. O'Mara then asked Trayvon's older brother why last year he had told a reporter that he wasn't sure if the voice belonged to Martin. "I didn't want to believe it was him," Jahvaris Fulton testified. Zimmerman’s father, in contrast, has said the screams were from his son rather than Martin. The screams are considered to be crucial pieces of evidence because they could determine who was the aggressor in the confrontation. An FBI expert testified earlier in the week that a person familiar with a voice is in the best position to identify it.
Prosecutors also called Shiping Bao, associate medical examiner for Volusia and Seminole counties, to the witness stand on Friday. Bao, who performed Martin’s autopsy a day after he was fatally shot, testified that the cause of death was a gunshot wound to the chest. The manner of death was a homicide, he said.
Bao, while reviewed autopsy photographs shown in court, also testified that Martin weighed 158 pounds at the time of his death and had no indication of prior disease before his confrontation with Zimmerman. Zimmerman’s attorneys are expected to begin their case after the prosecution rests. Zimmerman, 29, has pleaded not guilty, claiming self-defense.
On Wednesday, an expert witness testified that none of Zimmerman's DNA was found under the fingernails of Martin, despite defense attempts to portray Zimmerman as only firing his gun in self-defense. Crime lab analyst Anthony Gorgone also testified that two different DNA profiles were found on the pistol grip. One was Zimmerman's but the other could not be identified. However, Gorgone said he was able to determine that it did not match Martin's DNA sequence. Prosecutors spent most of Wednesday's proceedings painting Zimmerman as a police wannabe, amid testimony that featured technological glitches, forensic evidence and a prosecution witness who greeted Zimmerman from the stand.
Zimmerman faces life in prison if convicted of second-degree murder. The state argued during its opening statement that Zimmerman profiled and followed Martin in his truck and called a police dispatch number before he and the teen got into a fight.
Fox News' Joshua Rhett Miller, Perry Chiaramonte, Serafin Gomez and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/04...#ixzz2YBQbUJ3c
Last edited by loluchka80; 07-05-2013 at 11:02 AM.
The more I know about our justice system, the less faith I have in it to provide justice.
If Z. is found not guilty, the Mother should then be prosecuted for lyign under oath, because we all know she's lying under oath when she definitively identifies that voice as M.
In any event, let the social justice railroading continue.
EVERY cop including your truly was once a "wannabe cop". Are all aspiring police officers racist Tackleberries until proven otherwise?
As far as the voice ID issue the defense should simply put his Z's father on the stand. His credibility or lack thereof is no greater/worse that T's mother.
Last edited by PatriotReign; 07-05-2013 at 11:36 AM.
My own Mother can't tell me or my brothers apart over the phone. And thats just normal talking voice, not "about to die screaming in a non-usual way" voice.
My Mother also couldn't possibly be unbaised in the extreme in such a circumstance.
The "testimony" for what it is, is utterly worthless in facts, but invaluble in striking an emotional chord with the (all female) Jury.
Not facts, but how good one or the other may be at lying....since it's highly doubtful either truly recognize it.
Also assumes the Jurors will be emotionally neutral, and not side with the grieving mother over the trying to save his killer son Father.
Last edited by Churchill; 07-05-2013 at 12:06 PM.
Fish - this is why we have juries. What I find funny is the way everyone here is blindly assuming "Expert x said there would be confirmation bias" means "there will be confirmation bias".
2) I'd put all sorts of money on a "Not Guilty" verdict here. The lack of Zimmerman's DNA under Martin's fingernails is probably the best piece of evidence the prosecution has, but at the end of the day, there's nothing but reasonable doubt here.
The emotional "evidence" of testimony might say otherwise.
And I'll put equal money (well, maybe not equal, I'm no Lawyer) on the result being a riot of some form by African Americans a la Rodney King.2) I'd put all sorts of money on a "Not Guilty" verdict here. The lack of Zimmerman's DNA under Martin's fingernails is probably the best piece of evidence the prosecution has, but at the end of the day, there's nothing but reasonable doubt here.
If people riot it's because they have as little faith in the justice system as you do. They'll just blame the acquittal on a different kind of emotionalism.
It's also accurate. Like many sterotypes.This whole line of "they're women so they'll be subject to emotion and irrationality" is truly stereotyping of the worst sort (based on what evidence?).
No, it's because they're racist professional victims who just can't handle it when their victimhood is questioned or infringed.If people riot it's because they have as little faith in the justice system as you do.
Take a good listen to radio call in shows today, the most common phrase you'll hear black callers making is that discussion of eveidence is "insensitive", i.e. racist, because the ONLY fact that matters is M. was a "kid" or "child" and was killed.
Like with discussion of crime stats, there is seemingly NO desire to take responsabillity for the actual things done, only a desire to blame everyone and everything else so victims can stay victims, with all that includes.
Heaven forbid any of these folks admit that M. might have been his own worst enemy that night, by jumping and fighting the wrong guy on thewrong night......nope, it's all "hunted him down for being black".
What a crock the lot of it
Last edited by Churchill; 07-05-2013 at 01:12 PM.
The old joke... a man is convinced he is dead. His doctor asks him, "do dead men bleed?" He replied "Of course not." Doctor pricks his finger and man starts bleeding. "What do you say now?" doctor asks. Man answers: "I guess dead men DO bleed."
And I really really can't believe you think women can't serve as rational jurors. Guess they shouldn't vote either. Or for that matter lead any organization. Amazing.
I said women are more emotional than men in the majority, and they are, as almost every study done on the subject has showed. Women tend to be empathic, emotional thinkers, men more rational, less empathic, more solution-oriented thinkers. Science says this, not me.
What you've posted is a perfect example of a Straw Man.
Churchill: All all-women jury might be more suseptible to emotion-based testimoney of a mother who lost her son.
LiL: YOU HATES TEH WOMENZ!!!! YOU THINK THEZ BELONG IN KITCHEN WIF APRON!!!! YOU SAYZ THEY NO GET VOTE TOO!!! WHAT NEXT, NO ABORTION??? NO BIRFF CONTROLL!!!! WHY YOUZ HATE WOMEN SO MUCH YOU SEXIST MYSOGYNIST!!!!
The only reply old friend, to such a straw man, is