Wow - some days chicken salad and some days Florida state prosecutor.
George Zimmerman will be released on bail, set at $150,000. The prosecution had asked for $1 million, the defense for $15,000.
CNN has 1, 2, 3 transcripts. Here is the CNN live blog and the Guardian live blog. The single most interesting blog point I have seen made is here; I discuss it below, but you won't see me spoiling the surprise up here.
This was a ghastly opening day for Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda, who seemed unprepared and admitted as much:
"Mr. Gilbreath, I didn't know we were going to be trying the case, I'm going to add up -- I apologize."
Hello! Maybe the prosecutor should have prepped himself by reading up on 'Arthur' hearings:
Jeff Weiner, a former president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers who practices in Miami, said Zimmerman was not necessarily entitled to release on bail. He faces up to life in prison for second-degree murder, a crime for which suspects in Florida are not usually afforded bail.
But if Angela Corey, the special prosecutor assigned to the case, wants to oppose his release, she will have to preview at least some of the evidence the state has against Zimmerman in proceedings known in Florida as an Arthur hearing, Weiner said.
“The state has the burden of proof to go forward and convince the judge that proof of guilt is evident and that the presumption of guilt is great … That’s what this hearing is about,” Weiner said.
Well, maybe the prosecution got the wrong instructional video.
It's hard to pick the lowest of the low, but the darker moments for the prosecution included:
- The admission by co-lead investigator that he had not personally interviewed George Zimmerman;
- the admission that he had not requested Zimmerman's medical records from the hospital;
- the admission that the state has no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that, following the advice of the police dispatcher, he headed back to his car;
- the admission that the state has no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that Martin assaulted first.
- the admission that the investigtors have not been "given any insight" by the voice experts at the Orlando Sentinel and the FBI who attempted to identify the screams on the 911 tape (My 'told you so' moment).
Among the rays of light for the prosection was this:
UNIDENTIFIED MALE [de la Rionda]: And isn't it true that a lot of statements that he made do not make sense in terms of the injuries that he described. Did he not describe to the police that Mr. Martin had him on the ground and kept bashing his head on the concrete over and over and just physically beating him with his hands?
GILBREATH: He has said that, yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that there is evidence that indicates that's not true?
GILBREATH: Yes.
So the beating may not have been as fierce as Zimmerman described, or believed. However, the defense returned to this point, regrettably during a CNN break:
COSTELLO: Back live to the bond hearing in Sanford, Florida. Mark O'Mara, who is George Zimmerman's attorney is doing another redirect of the state's attorney investigator. They're talking about what injuries George Zimmerman had to his head that night. Let's listen.
GILBREATH: Managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found.
O'MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don't they? [ABC pic]
Dale; The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was.
O'MARA: Could that be cement?
GILBREATH: Could be.
O'MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn't consistent?
GILBREATH: I said it was.
Not a bad cross. The fact that some evidence points against Zimmerman's story does not mean that there is no evidence supporting it, as Mr. O'Mara demonstrated.
The prosecutor did offer this for a future "Great Moments In Cross Examination" video. The topic was Zimmerman's belated apology to the Martin's parents:
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why did you wait so long to tell Mr. Martin and the victim's mother, the father and mother, why did you wait so long to tell them?
ZIMMERMAN: I was told not to communicate with them.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. So even through your attorney, you didn't ask to do it right away? Your former attorneys or anything.
ZIMMERMAN: I did ask them to express that to them. And they said that they were going to.
Anybody can have a bad day.
NEVER BEEN IN A WEIGHT ROOM: Timothy Noah makes a possibly embarrassing admission about his own life style choices:
2.) Zimmerman "did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am." This would appear to suggest that Zimmerman wouldn't have fired the gun had he known Martin was 17. He fired the gun believing Martin was perhaps 25 or 26 (Zimmerman is 28.). The assumption, I guess, is that a 25 year-old is stronger or likelier to be carrying a gun or in some other way more potentially dangerous than a 17 year-old. There's no reason I'm aware of to believe that should be so. Zimmerman thereby confirms that he's a guy who leaps to conclusions.
I need help here - is there any sport where 17 year old males have an edge over older, stronger, more experienced 25 year olds? Riding, maybe? I'm stumped. (Yes, it's different for the young women, especially in gymnastics where puberty can be killer. For guys, puberty is muscle-up time... geez, am I explaining the birds and the bees to TNR writers?)
In any case, if Martin's age is irrelevant, why is he referred to as a child all the time? In the court of public opinion, his age matters, and if Mr. Noah thinks that apology was addressed exclusively to the people inside the courtroom, well, my goodness.
I will say his third point is a good one - Zimmerman's admission that he "did not know if [Martin] was armed or not" was not helpful to the defense. It's probably not that harmful, however - Zimmerman claims that Martin grabbed for Zimmerman's gun, causing him to fear death or grievous bodily harm.
In any case Zimmerman must have covered this ground in his repeated interviews with investigators, and what else could Zimmerman say - after the fact, what basis could he have had for saying he believed that Martin had been armed? That would be less plausible than his gun struggle claim (which I don't love - as a concealed carry permit holder, Zimmerman ought to know self-defense law and what to tell police.)
GOOD POINT: Assessments change, but on the 911 call Zimmerman described Martin as "late teens", yet he was older on the stand today. Why the change? Who knows? Maybe Martin had a deeper voice than Zimmerman associated with teens and aged him after he heard him speak just before their scuffle. Maybe Martin was stronger or fiercer than Zimmerman thought a teenager ought to be. Maybe he lied on the stand.
Well - the left will hang their hate on this, so props to Prof. Hutchinson, where I saw it first.
LOOKING FOR REACTIONS: Jeralyn Merritt has not chimed on with her thoughts (this whole day job thing interferes with so much punditry...) but her first commenter deserves a prize:
It appears the prosecution's legal strategy is... (wait for it)... The Sneering Tone of Voice.
Other than that I can't really see what he accomplished except to indicate to the judge he's a jerk.
Well, and unprepared.
The WaPo leads with the apology (as does everyone) and has this deep:
The hearing provided a few glimpses into the evidence amassed by investigators, and in some cases evidence they do not have.
Dale Gilbreath, an investigator for the state attorney’s office, testified that he does not know whether Martin or Zimmerman threw the first punch and that there is no evidence to disprove Zimmerman’s contention that he was walking back to his vehicle when confronted by Martin.
Gilbreath also said evidence does not back up parts of Zimmerman’s story, such as his claim that Martin was slamming his head against a sidewalk just before he pulled out his handgun and shot the teenager.
“That is not consistent with the evidence we found,” said Gilbreath, who did not provide details.
The NY Times makes no mention of the comical prosecution presentation. Better their readers get that grim news elsewhere. [OK, their unmarked updating has now added a section of the prosecution debacle.]
The LA Times has a bit of the bad news deep:
The hearing was also notable for the extensive grilling that O'Mara gave one of the investigators for the state attorney's office, Dale Gilbreath, who helped prepare the probable cause affidavit that was the basis for Zimmerman's arrest.
The affidavit says Zimmerman "confronted" Martin, after which a struggle ensued. In a likely preview of the defense strategy at trial, O'Mara questioned the use of the word "confronted."
"Do you know who started the fight?" he asked the investigator at one point.
"Do I know? No," Gilbreath said.
"Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?"
"No" Gilbreath said.
YOU KNOW IT WENT BADLY FROM THE HEADLINE: ThinkProgress:
Prosecutor: Zimmerman Allegedly Slapped His Ex-Girlfriend And ‘Asked Her How It Felt’
They left out "Defense Counsel Slaps Prosecutor, Asked Him How It Felt"
The judge was far less impressed that Think Progress by Zimmerman's inglorious past; fro the Guardian live blog:
The judge all but pooh-poohed the 2005 charges brought against Zimmerman for felony battery of an officer and resisting arrest. The charges were later reduced to a misdemeanor and Zimmerman never served prison time, although he was required to attend anger management classes.
This kind of thing is all too common, the judge said, suggested that the charges were somehow inflated and should not be taken as an indicator – that he, at least, would not be taking them as an indicator – of George Zimmerman's propensity for violence.
Well, the prosecutor impressed the stalwarts on the left, so he has that working for him. Too bad about the judge...
WHO KNOWS WHAT EVIL LURKS IN THE RETREAT AT TWIN LAKES? More hints of the dazzling prosecution case to come:
Now O'Mara is asking Gilbreath questions again. He's driving at how long after the operator told Zimmerman not to follow Martin that the suspect "continued to follow" the scene.
Gilbreath: "We have a witness statement who observed shadows or figures running by her residence." He says he can't identify who they were.
I'm betting one of the shadows was black, but did the other shadow look Hispanic or White Hispanic?
(FWIW, I can't find that in the CNN transcript, but they did keep cutting away for revenue breaks.)
ALWAYS WHERE YOU LEAST EXPECT IT: A comedy highlight - defense counsel O'Mara has co-lead investigator Gilbrath on the stand:
O'MARA: Ok. Have you ever had your nose broken?
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: Have you ever had your nose fractured or broken.
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: You know that that was an injury that Mr. Zimmerman sustained, correct?
GILBREATH: I know that that is an injury that is reported to have sustained. I haven't seen any medical records to indicate that.
O'MARA: Have you asked him for them?
GILBREATH: Have I asked him for them? No.
O'MARA: Do you want a copy of them?
GILBREATH: Sure.
O'MARA: I'll give them to the state. It's a more appropriate way to do it. If you haven't had them yet, I don't want to cross you on them.
Send better rodeo clowns.
YOU KNOW THAT'S RIGHT: From the conclusion of the prosecutor's closing statement:
I'm not here to argue all the facts, obviously.
Obvious as the day is long.
Watching an unprepared lawyer in a courtroom is awfully painful.
What was this clown thinking?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 03:01 PM
--Watching an unprepared lawyer in a courtroom is awfully painful.--
Depends on your perspective.
Two of the most wonderful days in my life were watching a couple of level headed judges in two separate cases castrating opposing counsel after giving them two or three days to hang themselves on largely fabricated and/or meritless cases.
Positively celebratory.
Posted by: Ignatz | April 20, 2012 at 03:09 PM
This lynching is losing its rope pretty quick.
Posted by: someguy | April 20, 2012 at 03:13 PM
They should have asked the investigator who from Justice is coaching him.
Posted by: Jane (Better a crate than a plate) | April 20, 2012 at 03:14 PM
"What was this clown thinking?"
Prosecuting 101: Never ask a question you don't already know the answer to.
FAIL.
Fucking bozos trying this "case."
Gonna be fun watching the race mongers heads explode when Zimmerman walks out of that courtroom Scot free.
Posted by: someguy | April 20, 2012 at 03:15 PM
So Trayon looks like he could have been Obama's son and the prosecutors perform as if they were Obama himself. Great days in American jurisprudence.
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 03:17 PM
It doesn't make any difference if the prosecutors are prepared or not. It doesn't make any difference if all the evidence is exculpatory. We're not talking about facts or law or any of that silly stuff. This is about Obama carrying Florida in November.
Posted by: glenn | April 20, 2012 at 03:18 PM
LOL, Clarice! +1
Posted by: AliceH | April 20, 2012 at 03:21 PM
100% of blacks could vote Democrat in November, and it really wouldn't change much, since 95%+ is already built in to the numbers.
That extra 5% of the black vote will likely cost more than 5% of any other group, and those other groups are all BIGGER.
Not very bright... but then, that's par for the course.
Posted by: Deoxy | April 20, 2012 at 03:25 PM
@glenn
The counter for Florida would be to attack the "white unjustifiably attacks black" meme that's gotten the play (He's hispanic). If this prosecution is politically driven for the presidential race, it can backfire badly in a state that has as many hispanics as Florida does.
Posted by: Bard | April 20, 2012 at 03:27 PM
Great comments Iggy and Clarice. LOLOL!
Posted by: daddy | April 20, 2012 at 03:30 PM
I'm on the road, in the Indy airport and missed the entire fiasco. This was not just a bad day; this was OJ and the gloves. I can see ethics charges and a suit against the State. Florida has nothing.
Posted by: MarkO | April 20, 2012 at 03:31 PM
The politics of this are fascinating. Remember that this was not a big story until weeks after it happened. It did not really become national until Crump came up with Dee Dee. Then Sharpton got into the act and the liberals were forced to go along with the narrative of big scary racist white guy shoots little black kid for walking while colored. Even the governor and prosecutor did not dare stand up to the mob on this.
But as the facts come out, the narrative is losing its appeal. Zimmerman is starting to look like the victim here and that could be reflected at the ballot box.
Posted by: Theo | April 20, 2012 at 03:32 PM
So Trayon looks like he could have been Obama's son and the prosecutors perform as if they were Obama himself.
Love it!
Posted by: Jane (Better a crate than a plate) | April 20, 2012 at 03:32 PM
I was somewhat struck by the defense's examination of one of the investigator who swore out the affidavit. Sure seemed like a lot of stuff there that he swore to, that he couldn't swear to on the stand today. It was a group document, but he couldn't testify who provided what, just to say that it was someone else (maybe the attorney they were working with?)
Also, interesting that the investigator had to testify that some of the words in it were loaded, without anything that he could point to support the loading of the words.
Posted by: Bruce | April 20, 2012 at 03:33 PM
This publicity circus is a big problem for Obama. There have already been black on white retribution attacks "for Trayvon." There will probably be several more between now and November, and for as long as this sick dog of a case is kept alive.
While those black on white attacks may not make national news, they will make the local news. And local news watchers tend to vote.
We may have been fooled once into thinking that Obama could bring the majority of blacks into mainstream of American values and thinking. We are not likely to be fooled in that way again.
Posted by: Alice Finkel | April 20, 2012 at 03:38 PM
Right peculiar, that foolishness.
==============
Posted by: Is that what fooled we? | April 20, 2012 at 03:40 PM
OT: anyone have any idea what "Select Specialty Hospital" means? My dad is being transferred to one, and mom is wondering what it means.
I checked the hospital's site, but it wasn't Lear to me.
Thanks!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 20, 2012 at 03:41 PM
The State's case and the MSM narrative are tied together. The MSM is going to backtrack, spin and wear out the memory hole by the time this trial is over.
Posted by: theBuckWheat | April 20, 2012 at 03:41 PM
Specialized acute care hospitals run by a company names "Select", Rob..Google it for more.
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 03:45 PM
Zimmerman is still in jail. He still has to post a huge bail. GPS monitoring. He faces the jeopardy of a trial by a jury that could be prejudicial against him.
This is a disgrace. Everyone of us could face a trial by the mob at any moment.
Posted by: Steve | April 20, 2012 at 03:45 PM
Love all of these F Lee Baily wannabe's. This was a bail hearing not discovery or disclosure.
O'Mara morinically tipped his hand to prosecution. It also appears that they have a witness to the *chase*.
Posted by: Danglen Chad, Esq. | April 20, 2012 at 03:46 PM
Jose Biaz (sp?), Casey Anthony's attourney, raised an important note. He said that, since GZ had introduced both the issues of age and weapons into the proceedings, those could be questioned within the context of their introduction.
For example, DA could have questioned the frequency of armed encounters GZ experienced on his patrol. Similarly, he could have bolstered the profiling argument by fishing for general statement on GZ's part about the age of perps he has encountered.
Good points. The DA really missed a softball.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 03:49 PM
People instinctively know that innocence is no defense against the mob. And anybody can envision the nightmare scenario where you find yourself on trial and facing a long prison sentence for something you didn't do. DuDa and his fellow travelers naively seem to believe it can't happen to them, but most people are not so sanguine. The more it starts to look to the muddle like Z might just be an innocent man (in the sense that he really did shoot Martin in self-defense), the worse it's going to be for Team Obama, who as president should have had more sense than to insert himself into the middle of it before all the facts were known.
Posted by: derwill | April 20, 2012 at 03:49 PM
Danglen, you'll love bubu, duda,KK, and sylvia--other fine thinkers such as ourself.
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 03:49 PM
O'Mara morinically tipped his hand to prosecution. It also appears that they have a witness to the *chase*.
Posted by: Danglen Chad, Esq. | April 20, 2012 at 03:46 PM
They appear to have a witness to the shadows of the chase, Chad.
Posted by: jwest | April 20, 2012 at 03:49 PM
"morinically"
LOL
Posted by: Polico | April 20, 2012 at 03:49 PM
Stee, it is an outrage but he doesn't HAVe to trust his fate to a moronic jury. He can opt for trial by judge. Let Ms lots of bling and bad teeth Corey chew on that possibility.
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 03:50 PM
"100% of blacks could vote Democrat in November, and it really wouldn't change much, since 95%+ is already built in to the numbers."
95% might be factored into the calculation, but there is nothing to say even 20% are planning to show up.
Besides, swing states could teeter on the difference of less then 20K voters. Getting Blacks in Florida to actually be motivated to show up will go a long way in an effort to "help" him.
Side-note: One also has to remember personal pride will be at play too. Obama doesn't want to lose in pitiful, Carter-like, fashion so every vote he can try to get will help keep it at least a littler closer even if he has zero chance of winning. This might be the "help" they are really going for in some places...
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 03:50 PM
Obama's boys desperately looking for a new shiny object to distract from this latest boo-boo.
A smart politician would have "showed restraint" and waited for the facts to come in.
Barack acted stupidly. He will be hounded by this for a long time.
Hehheheheheheheh.
Posted by: Meremortal | April 20, 2012 at 03:51 PM
"They appear to have a witness to the shadows of the chase, Chad."
Not to THE chase, to A chase. So really they have shadows and earwitnesses not really seeing and kind of hearing something...maybe.
Posted by: Polico | April 20, 2012 at 03:52 PM
100% of blacks could vote Democrat in November, and it really wouldn't change much, since 95%+ is already built in to the numbers.
It's not about percentages - those are as you say. It's about turnout. Black turnout in 2008 was higher than usual for obvious reasons and Barry needs every one of those voters to return to the polls for him this year. And more, to make up the difference with the white vote he's lost.
Obama needs Pookie's cousin in FL to get off the couch.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 20, 2012 at 03:52 PM
RHBH, Utter b.s. The DA could not on cross go into anything not covered by GZ's direct which was simply an apology to the Zimmermans. Which legal system is being used in Fla? CSI law or, um, real stuff?
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 03:53 PM
"Getting Blacks in Florida to actually be motivated to show up will go a long way in an effort to "help" him."
They couldn't even get folks to fill out voter registration cards at a Treyvon rally.
Posted by: Polico | April 20, 2012 at 03:54 PM
Z's testimony and injuries are actually quite consistent with M beating Z up and pounding Z's head into the concrete. Z has never said he didn't struggle.
If one views the second degree murder charge as being motivated by political considerations, this may have been a good day for Corey. If the immunity hearing results in the judge throwing out the charge, Corey still gets to say that she did what she could to get justice for M. Bernice de la Rionda takes the fall.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 20, 2012 at 03:54 PM
That extra 5% of the black vote will likely cost more than 5% of any other group, and those other groups are all BIGGER.
Not very bright... but then, that's par for the course.
You are correct on this one Deoxy in that he risks losing more votes than he wins with this approach. But as BlahBlahBlah points out, maybe it's more about optics. If he can maximize the black vote in FL, even if he loses the election at least he can feel like he went down swinging, or something.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 20, 2012 at 03:56 PM
Not to THE chase, to A chase. So really they have shadows and earwitnesses not really seeing and kind of hearing something...maybe.
Posted by: Polico | April 20, 2012 at 03:52 PM
But I’m sure the White-Hispanic looking shadow was chasing the black shadow – or at least that’s what it sounded like.
Posted by: jwest | April 20, 2012 at 03:56 PM
What was disclosed is that Corey's case is a few Kibbles shy of a teaspoon.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 20, 2012 at 03:56 PM
Ah, Instalanched --that explains the fly specks.
Posted by: Clarice | April 20, 2012 at 03:57 PM
"They appear to have a witness to the shadows of the chase, Chad."
Shadows, unidentified, in the rain, in the dark.
Reads like a joke, doesn't it? You couldn't put this in a detective novel because your editor would laugh you out of her virtual office.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 20, 2012 at 03:58 PM
Got cut off...sorry.
O'Mara knew that there wouldn't be anyone there capable of testifying to anything of substance. The Investigator appears pro forma to attest to the information in the affadavit. It's rare to the point of non-existent to question what is in the affadavit with direct examination. Questioning a police investigator about a prosecutor's choice of language is nothing more than a cheap lawyer trick. From the comments here, it worked.
BTW, Gilbraith isn't a prosecutor, he's a cop.
Posted by: Danglen Chad, Esq. | April 20, 2012 at 03:59 PM
"Not to THE chase, to A chase. So really they have shadows and earwitnesses not really seeing and kind of hearing something...maybe"
Its not necessarily even to "A chase" - it could just be One Guy Walking and passing two different light sources protecting two different shadow patterns.
The only thing they really have is witness to at least one person walking.
"Oooooohhhhhh... string him up!"
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 03:59 PM
"Gonna be fun watching the race mongers heads explode when Zimmerman walks out of that courtroom Scot free."
That would be nice, but I'm more worried about the more... excitable among them.
Posted by: Bill | April 20, 2012 at 03:59 PM
Floolwoig the advice of the police dispatcher, Zimmerman headed back to his car? That would make it federal, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Francis W. Porretto | April 20, 2012 at 04:00 PM
Has anyone looked into the political affiliations of the prosecutors? I am sure they are Republicans trying to sabatoge this case so that the bigoted Mormon can steal the election on lies about Obama eating dogs and by pointing out that Obama is black every chance he gets. Bush destroyed the economy, not Obama. Bush's tx cuts for the rich hurt women, children, minorities, and gays in horrible ways. Unlike Bush, who cared about nothing except Big Oil and Halliburton, which is why he started two illegal wars, Obama has assisted more people than ever enjoy the benefits of the social safety net so they did not starve. Bush would have them living an Oliver Twist existence so that his cronies could have an extra private jet standing by. The bottom line is that Trayvon Martin would still be alive if Bush hadn't spent 8 years telling people they didn't have to respect or care about dark people, whether they be blacks, Arabs, Hispanics, etc.
Posted by: Vinny B. | April 20, 2012 at 04:00 PM
Sketch artist works with "I see shadows" witness and produces the smoking gun.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 20, 2012 at 04:01 PM
O'Mara didn't tip the prosecution off to anything. Z's extensive cooperation with law enforcement makes it crystal clear what the theory of the defense will be. What O'Mara did today was make clear that if there is any plea, it's going to be on the defense's terms. In addition, even with the limited nature of Z's appearance today, O'Mara has served notice to the prosecution that he thinks Z would be a good witness. Finally, with Z's apology, O'Mara has deftly begun informing prospective jurors that Z is a good man.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 20, 2012 at 04:01 PM
I don't think it's significant that the lead chief investigator didn't personally talk to George Zimmermen. His lawyers certainly told him not to talk to anyone but them about what happened. It would have been a waste of time to try to interview him, and he surely knew that. Indeed it is probably a violation of legal ethics for the representative of a prosecutor to try to interview a defendant who has a lawyer
Posted by: twvolck | April 20, 2012 at 04:01 PM
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?
The shadows know!!!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 20, 2012 at 04:04 PM
Danglen, every lawyer has their opinion, that's what we do. But I don't think you can call O'Mara 'moronic'. First of all, O'Mara got a reasonable Bond for a client when he had no statutory right to Bond in a Murder 2 case-- he got his client FREE, that's huge. Next his client talked to the cops for hours the night this happened, anyway, so there's no surprising the State. Next, he's started putting some reasonable doubt in the Judge's and jury pool's mind. I think O'Mara did very well today, we'll see, but you can't call him moronic. That's just not right.
Posted by: NK | April 20, 2012 at 04:04 PM
"Has anyone looked into the political affiliations of the prosecutors?"
Casey is a Democrat. Not sure about anyone else.
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 04:05 PM
LOL, Vinny B. That's one of the best parodies of liberal idiocy I've ever read.
Posted by: derwill | April 20, 2012 at 04:05 PM
-- If one views the second degree murder charge as being motivated by political considerations, this may have been a good day for Corey. --
Nifong had a good day too, by that standard.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 04:06 PM
RHBH, Utter b.s. The DA could not on cross go into anything not covered by GZ's direct which was simply an apology to the Zimmermans. Which legal system is being used in Fla? CSI law or, um, real stuff?
Age and weapon not pertinent to a case that is clearly driven by what the DA suggests is an instance of profiling? I would think that this would be a gimme for the DA, a chance for issues importand to the DA's case to be expanded upon. Biaz seemed to think so as well.
And why, when GZ said he thought TM was closer to his age, couldn't the DA probe that assertation in an effort to get him to make a generaliztion supportive of the profiling argument? Or why, when he mentioned the part about not knowing if he was armed, couldn't the DA probe about GZ's experiences with armed people in his role with community watch. Just as the DA was caught off gaurd, why not try the same for GZ, even if it were in a limited fashion?
The judge gave a large amount of latitude to both sides, why not the the DA probe GZ's statement?
Oh, and by the way, don't watch CSI, have disliked that dumb redhead since Rambo 1.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:07 PM
This all about whipping up the black vote in November, the problem is, this REALLY alienates white voters and also Latinos (Zimmerman is Latino).
The black vote is already maxed out to the Democrat Party. That extra .01% of black turnout turnout will alienate the majority of Americans.
This is OJ all over again, with Obama saying Trayvon looks like his son. Slick Move.
Posted by: Get Real | April 20, 2012 at 04:07 PM
Brilliant parody, Vinny B!!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 20, 2012 at 04:08 PM
Two weeks back we saw the Solicitor General of the US waltz into the Supreme Court and get repeatedly clobbered by straightforward softball questions about Obamacare's Constitutionality that any high schooler paying attention had already pondered. Apparently those arguments were all completely new news to him (and to half the Lawyers on the MSMS staffs.)
Yesterday, Joe Bottini, corrupt Prosecutor in the Ted Stevens Trial, blamed his corrupt actions in the Ted Stevens Ttial on Ted Stevens, because Stevens demanded a speedy trial, thus not allowing Bottini and his Prosecution Team to be sufficiently prepared so that they wouldn't have had to act corruptly.
Now we watch De la Rionda admit he wasn't prepared to come into a courtroom on the biggest day of his professional life, and admit to being completely unprepared to competently react to what went on in today's courtroom.
I have been bamboozled. Reading DoT and Clarice and Jane and MarkO and TC and all you other Lawyers here at JOM, I have been suckered into thinking that Lawyer's in general were brilliant and intelligent. Now I find out otherwise, and that a great number of them are dimwitted, lazy buffoons, incapable of taking personal responsibility for their laziness and buffoonery without blaming it on somebody else.
I blame JOM for giving me this false impression.
Can I sue TM?
Posted by: daddy | April 20, 2012 at 04:08 PM
Danglen would appear to be a morin.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 04:08 PM
The case is a few skittles short of my cup of tea.
==============
Posted by: Plethora of flashlights, but we're all still in the dark. | April 20, 2012 at 04:08 PM
"O'Mara got a reasonable Bond for a client when he had no statutory right to Bond in a Murder 2 case-- he got his client FREE, that's huge."
It should be noted - for only 15K out of pocket (which can easily be donated by any number of sources even if he cant come up with it)
The prosecution wanted at least a million if they lost and he was given bail. They lost, and then lost again for good measure...
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 04:09 PM
I've had only a little experience with racial tension between blacks and hispanics, living in Northern VA. It's real and it's tense.
We do a kids' church ministry, and for the first year, the hispanic kids were afraid to come. It took a lot of work to ensure them that they would be perfectly safe on our watch. They are the new underclass, because of their recent immigration status, and because they kind of replaced blacks on the low totem pole or something.
Or maybe they're just an easy target. I don't really know.
So I really do wonder what good this will do Obama.
Posted by: Jane | April 20, 2012 at 04:10 PM
-- It's rare to the point of non-existent to question what is in the affadavit with direct examination. --
See Judge Hirsch's order in the Wyche case. He cites sections of witness transcript, and is otherwise quite deep in the weeds of the competing stories as told by numerous witnesses.
Not to say the hearing had direct examination of a witness on the stand, but the state isn't free to hold a person incarcerated by making general allegations. It must produce the evidence to support the allegation, or at least assert under oath that such evidence exists.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 04:10 PM
There's a difference, cboldt. Whatever one thinks of Corey, I don't think that she'll be disbarred when the dust clears. Whether Corey wins re-election is not going to hinge on whether the criminal law equivalent of Irving Younger gives her an A in trial practice.
This case is all about the optics.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 20, 2012 at 04:10 PM
ThomasC- I agree with your 4:01-- and add, O'Mara GOT HIS CLIENT OUT OF JAIL (soon). GZ had no automatic righ to Bond against Murder 2 charge (as I understand Fla law), O'Mara won a reasonable Bond. That was the goal today and O'Mara won the battle. With his client soon out of jail, the case can proceed at O'Mara's pace, and the plea negotiations can proceed at O'Mara's pace as well. If GZ is sitting in Seminole County lock up pending trial-- the pressure is on GZ. That pressure is now off. Again, today was a very good day for GZ IMO.
Posted by: NK | April 20, 2012 at 04:12 PM
I thought we no longer had a manned space program and then I read Vinny B.
==============
Posted by: Cap'n Moonbat's Visit to Heaven. | April 20, 2012 at 04:13 PM
-- Indeed it is probably a violation of legal ethics for the representative of a prosecutor to try to interview a defendant who has a lawyer --
When Zimmerman volunteered to being interrogated by Corey's team of crack investigators, he was not represented by counsel. That is the reason Corey's team gave for not interrogating him.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 04:13 PM
Oh, and by the way, don't watch CSI, have disliked that dumb redhead since Rambo 1.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:07 PM
I, for one, have nothing but fondness for dumb redheads and their proclivity towards unconventional sex.
Posted by: jwest | April 20, 2012 at 04:13 PM
oh, Damn, should've read further. Congrats, Vinny B, you fooled me.
=========
Posted by: More coffee. | April 20, 2012 at 04:17 PM
I, for one, have nothing but fondness for dumb redheads and their proclivity towards unconventional sex.
Ok, agreed, can't argue that. They also can have a proclivity towards casual violence and verbal abuse. Enter with caution.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:18 PM
I'm just reading through the CNN transcripts now, but I must say that Shellie Zimmerman sounds like an absolute gem.
Posted by: AliceH | April 20, 2012 at 04:18 PM
Posted by: Jane | April 20, 2012 at 04:10 PM
Janet, is that you? Since you are in NoVA I thought maybe you left off a t in your screen name...
Posted by: Porchlight | April 20, 2012 at 04:20 PM
-- here's a difference, cboldt. Whatever one thinks of Corey, I don't think that she'll be disbarred when the dust clears. --
My remark was to your standard for having a prosecutorial good day, "If the immunity hearing results in the judge throwing out the charge, Corey still gets to say that she did what she could to get justice."
By that standard, any meritless charge can be a good charge.
What the professional consequences are, to her, is another matter.
Posted by: cboldt | April 20, 2012 at 04:20 PM
Missed a 't', 4:10 Jane.
===========
Posted by: You can fun, but you can't hide. | April 20, 2012 at 04:20 PM
I'm just reading through the CNN transcripts now, but I must say that Shellie Zimmerman sounds like an absolute gem.
The wife was a little flat, but the parents were great. DA went fishing for an medical problems GZ may have had in the past (mental issues), and dad said something to the effect of "no, just a caved in skull". Funny moment.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:21 PM
"Oh, and by the way, don't watch CSI, have disliked that dumb redhead since Rambo 1."
Kyle: "Ike, do your impression of David Caruso's career"
Ike: "It's my turn!" (before belly-flopping)
...one of the greatest moments ever delivered in a sitcom imo. Gets me every single time...
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 04:21 PM
Among other things, I thought the prosecutor's cross of GZ was bush-league.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 04:23 PM
"Ok, agreed, can't argue that. They also can have a proclivity towards casual violence and verbal abuse. Enter with caution."
...as an Irish Male, I would just like to say...
RAAACCCCCCCCIIIIIISSSSSMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!
(that is how this game goes, right?)
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 04:23 PM
DoT-- is a link to the video of today's hearing?
Posted by: NK | April 20, 2012 at 04:24 PM
"Even though crimes were allegedly committed, at this point, what is taking place is comparable to a civil trial. As such, it is time for Mr. Obama to produce competent evidence. If he has no evidence to produce, he's in public opinion trouble. If a court or Congress forces the production of his original documents, it's over for Obama.
Simple little mistakes: hastily uploading an assembled image without first printing and scanning, and cutting a "2008" rubber stamp to create the appearance of "1980." And the Selective Service forgery alone is enough to end Obama's presidency.
Sheriff Arpaio is under personal attack, but curiously, the control-test findings of his team are not being refuted. Apparently oblivious of the fact that the White House tried to cover its tracks by quickly replacing its original file image, NPR naively reports: "For the record, we opened the file using Adobe Photoshop and found that [the birth certificate] contained only a single layer of information." Fortunately, thousands have the original White House posting preserved for perpetuity.
The establishment media are trying every way they can think of to discredit Sheriff Joe. As WND.com president Joseph Farah recently wrote, "[t]hey are no longer just protecting Obama. They are now protecting their own reputations." The problem, of course, is that after all the attacks on Joe Arpaio are exhausted and after all the dust settles, the evidence of Obama's forgeries will remain.
The problem for Obama and his enablers is that the evidence is objective. And it's there for everyone to see. Generations from now, professors in Adobe Photoshop and journalism classes will be discussing and analyzing the evidence of Obama's forgeries.
The very result that timid conservatives and liberal reporters feared will eventually catch up with them: loss of credibility.
On the flipside, those who questioned Obama's bizarre secrecy eventually will be vindicated."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/m-the_sea_change_obamas_confirmed_forgeries_are_not_going_away.html
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 20, 2012 at 04:25 PM
"Just as the DA was caught off gaurd, why not try the same for GZ, even if it were in a limited fashion?"
Perhaps because he'd alreadt been burned by asking questions to which he didn't know the answer.
NK, I'm not aware of such a link.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 04:26 PM
"Ok, agreed, can't argue that. They also can have a proclivity towards casual violence and verbal abuse. Enter with caution."
...as an Irish Male, I would just like to say...
RAAACCCCCCCCIIIIIISSSSSMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!
(that is how this game goes, right?)
Well, unfortunately, I'm half Irish, so no, I'm not a racist, I'm a self-hating drunk.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:27 PM
DoT-- are you watching video, or reading transcript?
Posted by: NK | April 20, 2012 at 04:27 PM
Is this the CSI Redhead we are supposed to not like or is there some other one we should be angry at?
Posted by: daddy | April 20, 2012 at 04:29 PM
"Danglen Chad, Esq."
Still fighting the 2000 election?
Poor thang.
Posted by: Jane (A dog in the crate is better than one on the plate) | April 20, 2012 at 04:31 PM
"Well, unfortunately, I'm half Irish, so no, I'm not a racist, I'm a self-hating drunk."
Well Zimmerman is half-minority and a champion for young blacks, yet it didn't slow anyone in the MSM down one bit...
So I stand by my
RAAACCCCCCCCIIIIIISSSSSMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!
charge...
:)
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 04:32 PM
Perhaps because he'd alreadt been burned by asking questions to which he didn't know the answer.
I guess I can buy that, but why was he so unprepared? Was he partying with LeBron and Wade last night. Isn't he aware that this is a somewhat important case to a somewhat largish swath of the public? If this is a prelude the the level of preparedness and thoughtfulness he will be bringing to the case, oooh boy. O'Mara might just take his lunch money in a rather easy fashion.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:33 PM
Neither, NK. i watched live on CNN starting in the middle of O'Mara's examination of Galbreath, and have read and seen excerpts of what preceded that.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 20, 2012 at 04:34 PM
OT, I no longer think those denizens of Fenway Park are so bad. (LUN)
Posted by: peter | April 20, 2012 at 04:35 PM
I'm with Peter - just grabbed this from Tiwtter:
Eric Fehrnstrom @EricFehrn
At Red Sox game, President Obama comes on big screen to recognize Fenway's 100th anniversary, followed by loud chorus of boos.
Posted by: centralcal | April 20, 2012 at 04:37 PM
Is this the CSI Redhead we are supposed to not like or is there some other one we should be angry at?
No, it's the dumb knowitall guy to dislike. She's the one we should have tied to a chair in our basement. (kidding, kidding...)
Well Zimmerman is half-minority and a champion for young blacks, yet it didn't slow anyone in the MSM down one bit...
So I stand by my
RAAACCCCCCCCIIIIIISSSSSMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!
charge...
:)
Dammit!!!
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:37 PM
Oh - so sorry Peter - didn't realize your link was the same as my cut and paste.
In any case, good news!
Posted by: centralcal | April 20, 2012 at 04:38 PM
"floolwoig"? Really?
Posted by: Bill | April 20, 2012 at 04:38 PM
I guess I can buy that, but why was he so unprepared?
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:33 PM
He might not have expected any opposition. Judging from the testimony of the lead investigator, who approached defense questions with the attitude of “don’t you read the newspapers?” the prosecution team seemed to believe the MSM version of events was universally accepted.
Posted by: jwest | April 20, 2012 at 04:39 PM
DoT-- thanks-- no TV here. I'd like to watch replays tonight, as you know watching is far more informative than reading a transcript.
Posted by: NK | April 20, 2012 at 04:43 PM
Ever since I heard the charge of 2nd Degree murder and not manslaughter, I wondered if the prosecution was not trying to throw the case for some reason.
Posted by: Jim | April 20, 2012 at 04:47 PM
"Whether Corey wins re-election..."
Too late:
"The Miami Herald >
Posted on Friday, 04.20.12
Fla. prosecutor in Martin case wins re-election
The Associated Press
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- The Florida prosecutor who charged George Zimmerman with second-degree murder is going to spend another four years in office.
Angela Corey on Friday won a new term after no one stepped forward to challenge the Republican in this year's election. Qualifying ended at noon.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/20/2759374/fla-prosecutor-in-martin-case.html#storylink=cpy
Posted by: Polico | April 20, 2012 at 04:47 PM
He might not have expected any opposition. Judging from the testimony of the lead investigator, who approached defense questions with the attitude of “don’t you read the newspapers?” the prosecution team seemed to believe the MSM version of events was universally accepted.
I found that attitude annoying and one which I felt helped O'Mara greatly. I also found it troubling that any time O'Mara tried to nail down specifics of the affidavit (ie, who on the procecution's side wanted the inclusion of the word 'profiled' or the cursing statments of GZ) he would rather smugly affirm that he did not and was unaware of who did. Did he just sign the damn thing without reading or participating in it's creation? Strange stuff right there.
Posted by: RHBH | April 20, 2012 at 04:47 PM
"Eric Fehrnstrom @EricFehrn
At Red Sox game, President Obama comes on big screen to recognize Fenway's 100th anniversary, followed by loud chorus of boos."
uhm, no sir - they are saying "Booorack, Booorack"
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah | April 20, 2012 at 04:50 PM
At Red Sox game, President Obama comes on big screen to recognize Fenway's 100th anniversary, followed by loud chorus of boos.
Apparently there were dog howls and barks also. Wouldn't it be great if Baraka is met everywhere he goes with "Who let the dogs out...woot..woot,woot"!!
By the way, Zimmerman looks very much Peruvian Indian "old race" as Wilder wrote in 'The Bridge of San Luis Rey'.
What a lovely Friday it has been.
Posted by: scott | April 20, 2012 at 04:51 PM
the prosecutor's cross of GZ was bush-league.
He really went full-throated show trial there.
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | April 20, 2012 at 04:52 PM