_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Yes, he said by the clothes.

I'm glad the press went after him on the race issue. Funny how they don't want this to be about race now. I hope someone puts together all the videos and articles that shows how they promoted this as a hate crime from the beginning.

The change in RJ's statement from "what are you talking about" to "what are you doing here?' Fits better with the narrative. "What are you talking about" could be RJ's translation of George's "No man, I don't have a problem.

lol -

Hmmm... I might prefer hunting something in #8 testimony...

Any study notes? I already reviewed the ones in the jury thread and missed it there too.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

I thought the same thing.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_268748/conten ... d=HaxZvhuW


At one point, West suggested that though Martin told her he was by his father's fiancee's house while Zimmerman was following him, that she doesn't know that for sure.

"Why he need to lie about that, sir?" Jeantel asked West.

"Maybe if he decided to assault George Zimmerman, he didn't want you to know about it," West replied.

"That's real retarded, sir," she said. "That's real retarded to do that, sir."

That would be appreciated, should you have any luck and share it (minute mark also?).

TIA

Very sorry but since I didn't catch it the first time or from Rumpole's recaps, I think it's a waste of time to repeat those actions. If anyone else wants to have a go at it, I'm interested too.

I'm not even sure what Selma said that helps the prosecution. I just read in passing about GZ making multiple trips back and forth to the T before LE arrived, and that was just a random poster at another forum, about as credible as MSM. There wasn't discussion on it there that I saw and I read a several pages after that mention. I went looking because just before signing off, WFTV guy, Greg Warmoth, and Bill Schaeffer said she was a good witness for prosecution but didn't say why.

If that poster was correct, the implication is that GZ could have planted the flashlight near the T to make it look like assault started there. But I don't recall any other witness statements that will back that up and don't recall hearing anything about it from her before either. In addition, MOM, to my eye, didn't seem particularly interested in her as far as trying to discredit, etc. If I understood her testimony, and it seemed the re-enactment confirmed this, she didn't go out or see anything until after the shot. Seemed like MOM used her to confirm other points, such as her shouting was not captured on recordings but it happened, etc.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

Branca finally got his recap up: http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zi ... witnesses/

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

I have a few things to say.

I can't stand Michael Stein.

Nancy Grace gave Tom Owens 10 minutes of free advertising tonight.

I was grateful to see a tweet that juror# 5 was wrotomg vigoriously when Rachel was testifying that Sybrinia was sitting beside her during her *chat* with Crump.

And last

Mark Eiglash is filling in for Dr. Drew tonight, and his guest panel, including the ditz Jenney are Traybots personified. Panning West for his rudeness towards Rachel, and gloryifying how she spoke truthfully.

They all agree however, that she was coached last night.

Oh brother, looking at this pose of Lauer. its like she trying to show off her latest breast enhancement.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJmHzKK9 ... r_embedded

I suppose Mary Crutcher will be the next ear witness.

Never testified to it that way. I knew there were parts mentioning a couple/few steps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJmHzKK9 ... r_embedded
Under Direct:
25:40
"he took a few steps from where the body was - in the direction towards the dog rubbish receptacle."
26:30
"he walked for a few steps - he walked towards the receptacles, then walked back. While he was doing this pacing…"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation ... _9C4MaHqUI
Cross Exam:
17:56
"he walked in the direction of the trashcans and then he returned to the body - and I would assume that he did it 2 or 3 times before this person with the flashlight showed up."
24.50
"he walked in that direction (recepticle), came back, the he walked in that direction again, came back again, and then he walked in that direction and the man with the flashlight came."

Note: The dog rubbish receptacle is also called the trash cans in the translations.

The timeline WRT when the altercation began has a couple of discrepancies that need to be examined and considered in light of the testimony of Jenna Lauer, which if I understood correctly Jenna stated that she heard her neighbor John Good speaking loudly telling the struggling men to "knock it off" or something to that effect and that John was calling 911, and that Jenna heard John saying these things after she was already connected with 911 on her own call.

Jenna also estimated it was 30 seconds from the time of first hearing the voices or noises? in the vicinity of the Tee when Jenna called 911. That 30 seconds being correct would put the beginning of the altercation 2 seconds before the cutoff of the phone of W8 which would be significant to showing the testimony of W8 about hearing things just as the phone was cutting off to be technically plausible.

A conflict arises with the account of the accused that the altercation began maybe 20-30 seconds after his own call to the NEN operator Noffke ended. That time estimate is obviously wrong, and I had thought it was wrong the first time I heard that time estimate by the accused.

A conflict also arises WRT the witness with whom Serino did a walkthrough which timed the loud talk of John Good saying "911" as occurring 1 minute before the shot, which would be more like 30 seconds before the shot to be consistent with the testimony of Jenna Lauer. Personally I think the account of Jenna Lauer is more credible and fits better with the timing of the call also made by John Good W6. It had seemed odd before that the 911 call of W6 would have been so delayed if the estimated time for W6 shouting "I'm calling 911" was a full minute before the shot as shown by Serino's walkthrough with the neighbor across the way, who obviously was likely moving faster than she thought to make her own 911 call during the actual event, than the lesiurely pace of the reenactment.

It appears the altercation started later in time than was previously believed, which adds even more time for the deceased to have been able to reach the residence of Brandi Green and return travelling North to the East - West top of the Tee.

this is what I heard

Rachel said TM was at his daddy's fiance's house
GZ said TM is running and I don't know where he is

TM was "away from GZ" and out of sight.

All of a sudden TM was in GZ's face

TM "came bacK' (that was TMs choice)

Makes TM the agressor

_________________
Puzzler - that which puzzles or perplexes; anything that arouses curiosity or perplexes because it is unexplained, inexplicable or secret.

Yes I agree and the legal commentator on CNN Mark Geragos said last night that the timeline makes the prosecution theory impossible, but was declining to explain all the full particulars about how the timeline makes it impossible that the accused "chased down" the deceased near the intersection of that Tee when that confrontation occurred there, because such a scenario does not fit the timeline. So something else happened, something just reverse about who chased down whom at that location and time, as a plausible scenario which fits the timeline. This is nothing new to recognize what is the only plausible, or at least the most likely scenario, as explanation for what occurred, that would fit the timeline. The deceased doubled back and retraced his movements to confront the accused who had been eluded minutes earlier. The only "pursuit" sort of rapid movement along the vertical North - South part of the Tee reported being noticed by any witnesses, was the hearing of movement of someone running and travelling North BEFORE the shot was heard. And that could only have been the deceased running to intercept the accused near the intersection of the Tee, which was right outside the open window of the corner townhouse resident Jenna Lauer. Such a scenario fits the timeline to a Tee.

The lady that testified today - one where the scuffle/shooting took place outside her house...Jenna Lauer.
she discussed a bush at the front of her house near the house numbers - how it's hard to see the numbers if you're not standing in just the right place, due to the big bush.

That bush was big enough for TM to hide beside - as dark as it was that night, no one would have seen TM if he were hiding next to that bush. His dark top would blend in with the dark bush, his light pants would blend in with the light color of the home.

_________________
Puzzler - that which puzzles or perplexes; anything that arouses curiosity or perplexes because it is unexplained, inexplicable or secret.

Another thing...

Rachel's testimony made it clear that she was questioned by Bernie, with an assistant from his office and Sabrina and Crump.
They even came and picked Rachel up and drove her to Sabrina's house.

We clearly learned how much Rachel skewed her comments based on Sabrina sitting right beside her.

However, I think there's more to consider. This was the prosecution's case, specifically Bernie's case, and HE made the decisions to hold the interview/depo at Sabrina's house and to allow Crump/Sabrina to attend.

Has there EVER been such bad decision-making from a prosecutor???

What consequences could Bernie's actions reap him, once this trial is over?

You reap what you sow...

_________________
Puzzler - that which puzzles or perplexes; anything that arouses curiosity or perplexes because it is unexplained, inexplicable or secret.

Bringing forth this post from:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zi ... witnesses/


PhillyGuy | June 27, 2013 at 10:09 pm
Mr. West probably caught her in a fatal lie if they were paying close attention. She said she could barely hear because the ear buds had separated from TM’s ear.

In truth, police found the ear buds in TM’s pocket when they searched his body. It was in evidence already. So she was coached to say that.

I’ll be curious to see if defense snapped to that.

_________________
Puzzler - that which puzzles or perplexes; anything that arouses curiosity or perplexes because it is unexplained, inexplicable or secret.

Didn't they show a picture of the body with the earbuds lying on the grass near his head? Or did I imagine it?

No you weren't dreaming.... but I don't think many people saw the pic... the only time it aired publicly was a mistake I think... up on live feed as a practice shot during lunch break, day 13. I posted it as a "BOMBSHELL" because it finally answered one of the long term arguments.

The ear-buds are right by dead TM's head... and so clearly he did NOT put them in his pocket as preparation for fight. Also in other pics the Button was still pinned to TM's sweat shirt.


**** WARNING Dead body closeup****

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light