Author Topic: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?  (Read 98858 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #135 on: December 20, 2012, 01:32:55 PM »
Dee Dee hasn't said Zimmerman was on the dogwalk.

Not explicitly, but doesn't she place the action near "his father's house"?  Just what is her utility to the prosecution at the immunity hearing?

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #136 on: December 20, 2012, 02:09:06 PM »
Dee Dee hasn't said Zimmerman was on the dogwalk.

Not explicitly, but doesn't she place the action near "his father's house"?

No.

Dee Dee said Martin told her he was 'right by his father's house', before the interval she glossed over as 'a couple of minutes'. Comparing with other timeline evidence, that could have been a literal two minutes, or somewhat longer. Zimmerman would still be on the phone with the dispatcher for most of that time.

I don't agree with those who take 'right by his father's house' to mean in Brandy Green's back yard, but that's beside the point here. Wherever Martin was at the start of the 'couple of minutes', there was time for him to walk to some unknown point, then turn around and start walking back towards home, and pass through the area where the commotion seems to have started.

That's the theory I would go with, and I think the prosecution might. So far, though, it looks like they are going to brazen through with the simpler story that ignores geography and arithmetic.

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #137 on: December 20, 2012, 02:13:32 PM »
Would the 5th excuse her from testifying in a case that isn't hers? I think it would just mean the testimony couldn't be used in her trial.

Witnesses can and do take the 5th. That's why prosecutors grant witnesses immunity. There are two types of immunity: transactional and use. Transactional immunity is complete immunity from prosecution, while use immunity prevents the testimony, and information derived through it, from being used against the witness.

I'd forgotten that Florida has a statute that automatically grants use immunity to subpoenaed witnesses:

Quote
914.04 Witnesses; person not excused from testifying or producing evidence in certain prosecutions on ground testimony might incriminate him or her; use of testimony given or evidence produced.óNo person who has been duly served with a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum shall be excused from attending and testifying or producing any book, paper, or other document before any court having felony trial jurisdiction, grand jury, or state attorney upon investigation, proceeding, or trial for a violation of any of the criminal statutes of this state upon the ground or for the reason that the testimony or evidence, documentary or otherwise, required of the person may tend to convict him or her of a crime or to subject him or her to a penalty or forfeiture, but no testimony so given or evidence so produced shall be received against the person upon any criminal investigation or proceeding. Such testimony or evidence, however, may be received against the person upon any criminal investigation or proceeding for perjury committed while giving such testimony or producing such evidence or for any perjury subsequently committed.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #138 on: December 20, 2012, 02:52:04 PM »
Not explicitly, but doesn't she place the action near "his father's house"?

No.

Dee Dee said Martin told her he was 'right by his father's house', before the interval she glossed over as 'a couple of minutes'. Comparing with other timeline evidence, that could have been a literal two minutes, or somewhat longer. Zimmerman would still be on the phone with the dispatcher for most of that time.

I don't agree with those who take 'right by his father's house' to mean in Brandy Green's back yard, but that's beside the point here. Wherever Martin was at the start of the 'couple of minutes', there was time for him to walk to some unknown point, then turn around and start walking back towards home, and pass through the area where the commotion seems to have started.

That's the theory I would go with, and I think the prosecution might. So far, though, it looks like they are going to brazen through with the simpler story that ignores geography and arithmetic.

I think the defense will establish that Zimmerman and Martin finally met face to face at almost exactly the same place that Zimmerman, sitting in his truck, saw Martin disappear from, four minutes earlier.  I even think they might accomplish that without having Zimmerman testify.  Is that consistent with what DeeDee says?  What would the prosecution give as an explanation for it that is consistent with DeeDee's narrative?
« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 02:55:36 PM by RickyJim »

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #139 on: December 20, 2012, 07:47:18 PM »
I think the defense will establish that Zimmerman and Martin finally met face to face at almost exactly the same place that Zimmerman, sitting in his truck, saw Martin disappear from, four minutes earlier.  I even think they might accomplish that without having Zimmerman testify.  Is that consistent with what DeeDee says?  What would the prosecution give as an explanation for it that is consistent with DeeDee's narrative?

In all of Dee Dee's statement, she offers very little information about where TM or where GZ were.  She speaks of TM going through the front gate and running  under the mail thingy and she talks of TM being right by his fathers house after losing GZ.  Other than that, she doesn't offer a thing about TM's location.  So whether she testifies or not, the only thing I see that contradicts GZ is TM running in through the front gate and directly to the mail thingy and hanging out there until GZ and TM spot each other.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #140 on: December 20, 2012, 09:47:14 PM »
I think the defense will establish that Zimmerman and Martin finally met face to face at almost exactly the same place that Zimmerman, sitting in his truck, saw Martin disappear from, four minutes earlier. I even think they might accomplish that without having Zimmerman testify.

That would be in what I called 'the area where the commotion seems to have started.' This point is supported by several neutral witnesses, and controverted only by a few of Zimmerman's own statements.

The evidence for where Martin disappeared is much weaker. It's only Zimmerman's statements and the police call recording, and the recording is inconclusive apart from the statements. But I know of no evidence that is inconsistent or points to a different place.

Four minutes is about right if I'm interpreting the phone records correctly. Zimmerman seems to have lost sight of Martin about two minutes before his call ended at 7:13:39. The first 911 call connected at 7:16:11.

On Hannity, Zimmerman claimed he encountered Martin within 30 seconds of the end of the police call.

Video, 0:47-1:50
Quote
ZIMMERMAN: I wanted to make sure that, I believe they asked me for my address. And I wanted to be sure that nobody was lingering and could hear my address and then come back. And I was making sure that there wasn't anybody that was going to surprise me, and just trying to give them an accurate location.

HANNITY: Because they said, you know, can we meet you here at a certain location. And you said have them call me.

ZIMMERMAN: Yes.

HANNITY: Why did you want them at that point to call you?

ZIMMERMAN: I hadn't given them a correct address. I gave them a, the clubhouse vicinity. However, I was walking through to my street, Retreat View Circle. And I was going to give them the actual street number and name.

HANNITY: How long was it, George, after that, that you saw Trayvon again? Because, you said you stopped, that you did not continue pursuing him. When did you next see Trayvon Martin?

ZIMMERMAN: Less than thirty seconds.

In the reenactment, it took Zimmerman about 20 seconds to walk from where he stopped near RVC to where he said Martin accosted him. (7:08-30)

Quote
Is that consistent with what DeeDee says?

Yes.

Dee Dee said absolutely nothing about the 'couple of minutes', except that they passed. Before this silent period, Martin was 'walking back again'. After it, he became aware of Zimmerman, 'following him again'.

What did Martin do during the 'couple of minutes'? Did he keep walking the whole time? Did he stop walking at some point? Did he run? Skip? Dance a jig? Dee Dee didn't say. De la Rionda didn't ask.

I think O'Mara will ask.

Dee Dee may not have answers, except that she has already relayed everything Martin told her. She might say that, after Martin thought he had lost Zimmerman, they went back to talking about teenage things until Martin became aware of Zimmerman again.

I think Dee Dee will have at least one more thing to say. O'Mara will ask the obvious question that de la Rionda did not. What was Martin doing just before he became aware of Zimmerman, 'following him again'? I think Dee Dee will say that he was going home.

Dee Dee might say a lot more. She could offer some elaborate story to account for Martin's time. She might say he went to some friend's house, knocked at the door, and found no one home. There's no reason she should know much about this friend. It's not likely he would be identified, to be asked if he was home that night or not.

Between those possibilities, Dee Dee might say that Martin said some things she didn't understand at the time, which in the light of other information are hints at what he might have been doing.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 09:59:22 PM by nomatter_nevermind »

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #141 on: December 21, 2012, 07:56:55 AM »
Dee Dee does say TM is going to run from/for the back of his dad's house because it was easier.  Now this does not guarantee a route of TM heading down the dog walk from the 'T', but its not incompatible with GZ's account.  Could be viewed as corroborating evidence to GZ's statements of where TM disappeared.

I agree, O'Mara will be very interested in what Dee Dee has to say about the couple of minutes between when TM lost GZ and was right by his fathers house until GZ is spotted again.  My guess is the answer will be "I don't remember".

I would think O'Mara would also be interested in what TM did for the 15 or so minutes from the time he ran into the complex and under the mail shelter until GZ places his NEN call.  She has him getting to the mail thingy before the 6:54 call connects.  From the weather report, it doesn't appear that it was raining particularly hard at this point (heaviest rain was around 7:10-7:30 from the weather report.  I can't view the bank videos at work, but I recall at least one showing it raining pretty hard at some point.  Does anyone have recollection for how hard they show it raining around 6:54 and from that point until say 7:15?

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #142 on: December 21, 2012, 08:24:47 AM »
The evidence for where Martin disappeared is much weaker. It's only Zimmerman's statements and the police call recording, and the recording is inconclusive apart from the statements. But I know of no evidence that is inconsistent or points to a different place.
The NEN call is the one piece of evidence the prosecution is certain to introduce in their case.  I think that everyone will accept that Zimmerman was accurately reporting his observations and opinions on it.  If Zimmerman had Martin in view after the "down towards the other entrance of the neighborhood" and the end of the call almost 2 minutes later, he would have mentioned it on the call.  The fact that Zimmerman could look through the cut through will be established, I expect, by police testimony concerning the position of the parked Ridgeline.  Putting the two together, Martin had to have disappeared down the dogpath since Zimmerman wouldn't, I think, have been able to see that he ran in the direction of the back gate if Martin had turned right on RVC.  Even if I am wrong about the last point and Martin turned right on RVC, he returned to the dogpath through a pass between a block of houses or maybe TTL. 

Now maybe this is all consistent with DeeDee and perhaps Martin and Zimmerman encountered each other finally by accident, without either running after the other.  But I am still left wondering how her account helps the prosecution either at the immunity hearing or at trial.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #143 on: December 21, 2012, 09:15:43 AM »


On Hannity, Zimmerman claimed he encountered Martin within 30 seconds of the end of the police call.

Video, 0:47-1:50


Your interpretation of what Zimmerman means is the only one that makes sense.  If you interpret what Zimmerman says as an answer to Hannity's preceding question, it was 30 seconds after he lost sight of Martin.
Quote
    HANNITY: How long was it, George, after that, that you saw Trayvon again? Because, you said you stopped, that you did not continue pursuing him. When did you next see Trayvon Martin?

    ZIMMERMAN: Less than thirty seconds.

« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 09:17:41 AM by RickyJim »

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #144 on: December 21, 2012, 10:10:52 AM »
Dee Dee does say TM is going to run from/for the back of his dad's house because it was easier.

No.

She said 'from the back'. She didn't say the back of what.

I doubt she meant he was running from the back of an actual place or thing. I think 'from the back' is some kind of idiomatic expression in her dialect, which needs to be clarified.

I don't know why at least one transcript has 'for' instead of 'from'. If you listen to the recording the word is quite clear, every time she used that expression.

The first time she used that expression, it seemed that Trayvon and Dee Dee were discussing whether he should run 'from the back' or 'to his dad's house', as though these expressions named quite distinct actions. That's around 7:20 on the recording.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #145 on: December 21, 2012, 10:32:29 AM »
It later occurred to me that there might be a way to try to get the money-hiding evidence in, and it seems to me that it's right up BDLR's alley. Using Judge Lester's rather outlandish conclusion in his 2nd bond-hearing ruling that Zimmerman intended to use the money to flee, claim that hiding the money was part of an escape plan, and therefore shows consciousness of guilt.  I have no idea if it would fly, but note that the time has passed for the defense to challenge Lester's decisions, so all aspects of his bond-hearing ruling presumably still stand. Of course, that approach can be used regardless of whether Zimmerman testifies.

I think an argument can be made that intention to flee does not necessarily show consciousness of guilt so much as it shows consciousness of the fact that innocent men get convicted and sent to prison all the time, and that Zimmerman went from thinking that he'd explained everything to the satisfaction of the police that it was self-defense and that there wouldn't be any charges, to it seeming that the entire government of the state of Florida had decided to throw him to the wolves to appease public  opinion.

The guilty may flee when no man pursueth, but so might a man who considers himself innocent if he thinks he's about to be railroaded.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #146 on: December 21, 2012, 10:51:44 AM »
Putting the two together, Martin had to have disappeared down the dogpath since Zimmerman wouldn't, I think, have been able to see that he ran in the direction of the back gate if Martin had turned right on RVC. 

I don't understand this. What would Zimmerman have been able to see if Martin turned onto the dogwalk, that he wouldn't have been able to see if Martin ran to RVC before turning? Either way, Martin would have turned right and disappeared behind a building.

The dogwalk doesn't lead to the back entrance. Its southern end is a T, mirroring the one at the north end. Of three possible routes, TTL, RVC, and the dogwalk, TTL is the one that leads to the back entrance if you keep following it.

Absent Zimmerman's statements, the police call is consistent with any of the three, but TTL seemed most likely to me. We discussed this on the blog, before Zimmerman's statements were released.

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #147 on: December 21, 2012, 12:26:54 PM »
No.

She said 'from the back'. She didn't say the back of what.

I doubt she meant he was running from the back of an actual place or thing. I think 'from the back' is some kind of idiomatic expression in her dialect, which needs to be clarified.

I don't know why at least one transcript has 'for' instead of 'from'. If you listen to the recording the word is quite clear, every time she used that expression.

The first time she used that expression, it seemed that Trayvon and Dee Dee were discussing whether he should run 'from the back' or 'to his dad's house', as though these expressions named quite distinct actions. That's around 7:20 on the recording.

I don't disagree with anything you say.  I used "from/for", because I think when she relays her story and uses the word "from" I think the most likely explanation is that TM means for.  Dee Dee has TM in front of GZ's car, so clearly they aren't talking about running from the back of his car.  She tells him to run to his dad's house which is when TM relays that he's going to run from the back because its "mo easier".  It makes sense that it would be a shorter and more direct route to run to the back of the house if he is near the dog walk and to me it seems like he's confirming to her the suggestion to run to his dad's and that running "from" the back is easier.  I can't think of a more logical explanation given the context of the conversation, information provided by GZ and where the conflict ultimately took place that "from" is her way of saying "for" or "to".

As I said earlier, its not proof of the path he took, but it certainly doesn't conflict with anything GZ says and in the context of it being "more easier", "from the back" most likely means down the dog path to the back of his dad's house.


Offline Lousy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Rate Post +6/-30
  • Fetch my hammer
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #148 on: December 21, 2012, 12:31:13 PM »
I don't understand this. What would Zimmerman have been able to see if Martin turned onto the dogwalk, that he wouldn't have been able to see if Martin ran to RVC before turning? Either way, Martin would have turned right and disappeared behind a building.

The dogwalk doesn't lead to the back entrance. Its southern end is a T, mirroring the one at the north end. Of three possible routes, TTL, RVC, and the dogwalk, TTL is the one that leads to the back entrance if you keep following it.

Absent Zimmerman's statements, the police call is consistent with any of the three, but TTL seemed most likely to me. We discussed this on the blog, before Zimmerman's statements were released.

It is the shortest route to the back gate for pedestrians only. It also affords easy access to the back gate. The dog path seems to be the logical route to the back gate when fleeing or avoiding a man in (or with ) a car.

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: How Would the Prosecution Present Their Case?
« Reply #149 on: December 21, 2012, 12:55:20 PM »
Agreed.  If Martin went down TTL towards the back entrance, he wouldn't have been doing anything to avoid GZ who could have seen him for a fair distance on that path and easily could have followed in his car.   I could see potentially going down TTL until he could cut between buildings and end up in the dog walk path. That wouldn't be inconsistent with what Dee Dee relays, but I think she is pretty clearly telling a narrative of TM running to his house, not to the back entrance.


 

Site Meter
click
tracking