Author Topic: Thoughts on Week One of Trial  (Read 18925 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #105 on: June 30, 2013, 07:59:27 AM »
Surdyka saw two people on the ground at a distance of 80 feet or more, with no flashlight.

Wasn't Good much closer, and didn't he testify that even with his own porch light he could barely see, or something along those lines?

TM was wearing dark clothing--and dark grey or wet grey is really hard to see at night. Harder than most blacks actually.

Plus which I think Surdyka has been pretty well discredited hasn't she? Pop pop pop, boy's cry for help, not to mention her claims of Olympic qualification (top three in the world!).

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #106 on: June 30, 2013, 08:42:10 AM »
Wasn't that right about the time she was hearing all 3 gunshots?

Surdyka reported seeing two men wrestling on her 911 call, at a time when she had no other way of knowing they were there. Are you suggesting she couldn't really see them, and coincidentally hallucinated people who were actually there?

Surdyka reported one 'pop noise' on her 911 call. Everything on her 911 call is consistent with the other evidence.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #107 on: June 30, 2013, 09:02:36 AM »
has there been no testimony on where the skittles were found?

According to her SAO interview summary (35/284), ME Investigator Tara Malphurs 'began removing items from the Victim. The Skittles was [sic] in the top front pocket of the Victim's hoodie.'

As for trial testimony, I expect we will hear from Malphurs before the ME.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #108 on: June 30, 2013, 09:38:10 AM »
Here is an hour long session on the first week with Richard Hornsby.  He still thinks there will be a compromise verdict because, "the minority juror keeps looking over at Sybrina Fulton".

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #109 on: June 30, 2013, 09:40:09 AM »
Surdyka reported seeing two men wrestling on her 911 call, at a time when she had no other way of knowing they were there. Are you suggesting she couldn't really see them, and coincidentally hallucinated people who were actually there?

Surdyka reported one 'pop noise' on her 911 call. Everything on her 911 call is consistent with the other evidence.

From Andrew Branca, blogging testimony at Legal Insurrection (a practicing lawyer in his third decade):
Quote
More objectively, however, were observation testimony by Sudyka that was clearly contrary to facts known and accepted by everyone else involved in the case. On at least three separate occasions Sudyka referred to the “three shots” fired by Zimmerman–”pop, pop, pop”. No one but her has ever suggested that there was more than a single shot fired.

She testified that it was while she as on the 911 call with police that the shot was fired, sticking to that assertion vigorously. In fact, the 911 recording was played in court–yes, every single 16 minutes of it–and no shot was audible.

She also described the relative positions of Zimmerman and Martin at the moment the shot was fired as being such that the bullet could only have struck Martin in the back (that is, she describes him as laying face down on the ground at that moment, with Zimmerman above him). We know, of course, that Martin was shot in the center chest area, right over the heart, and the bullet did not over-penetrate.

Interestingly, Sudyka also stated several times that the rainfall at the time was quite heavy–’buckets of rain” was the phrase she used, so intense that she needed to close a window to prevent rain from entering her home. This observation favors the defense, which has suggested that the rain may have washed away the traces of blood that several witnesses have said was not evident at the scene. Indeed, so damaging were these statements to the State that Mr. de la Rionda rose on re-direct for the sole purpose of inducing Sudyka to make corrective statements downplaying the intensity of the rainfall.

Sudyka also was insistent that she had heard two voices, one a loud, aggressive, confrontational, dominating voice and the other a softer, meeker voice. She attributed the confrontational voice to Zimmerman and the meeker voice to the “boy,” Martin. It emerged on cross, however, that she had never previously heard either Zimmerman or Martin’s voice, and was making her assignment based on assumptions of how they might sound, not on personal knowledge.

So her 911 call was totally different from her in court testimony, which was totally different from the testimony of other witnesses.

And she lied about the Olympics it seems. So she's not credible at all, even if, like a broken clock, she veered into being right a couple of times.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #110 on: June 30, 2013, 10:18:41 AM »
From Andrew Branca, blogging testimony at Legal Insurrection
Quote
No one but her has ever suggested that there was more than a single shot fired.

Wrong. Jonathan Manalo (W-13) told Serino on 2/26/12, that he and his wife heard 'a loud pop, or two pops' and 'a couple of pops'.

Quote
like a broken clock, she veered into being right a couple of times.

Are you seriously suggesting that the statements on Surdyka's 911 call, most of which (a lot more than two) are corroborated by other testimony, none of which are contradicted, are all just lucky guesses, at a time when she had no information but her own observations on which to base such guesses?

If her accurate statements are all lucky guesses, wouldn't you expect them to be random across time, instead of concentrated in her 911 call?

I think it is much more sensible to conclude that Surdyka observed and reported accurately during and immediately after the events, and afterwards her recollections drifted.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #111 on: June 30, 2013, 11:01:45 AM »


Wrong. Jonathan Manalo (W-13) told Serino on 2/26/12, that he and his wife heard 'a loud pop, or two pops' and 'a couple of pops'.

Are you seriously suggesting that the statements on Surdyka's 911 call, most of which (a lot more than two) are corroborated by other testimony, none of which are contradicted, are all just lucky guesses, at a time when she had no information but her own observations on which to base such guesses?

If her accurate statements are all lucky guesses, wouldn't you expect them to be random across time, instead of concentrated in her 911 call?

I think it is much more sensible to conclude that Surdyka observed and reported accurately during and immediately after the events, and afterwards her recollections drifted.

I think we're commenting past each other again.

Part of what I'm saying is that her 911 call was played in court, it's been entered into evidence, right? And she testified in person, right?

Her in person testimony differed from the 911 call.

With those events, and other things, it seems fair to suggest she's unreliable overall, not just here.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #112 on: June 30, 2013, 11:06:35 AM »
BTW, NM, I believe Andrew Branca was talking about "court" because he wrote "testimony".

I didnt' watch Manolo's testimony, but I haven't seen a transcript yet where he testifies that he heard multiple gun shots. Which doesn't mean he didn't, just that I haven't seen/found it.

Surdyka's testimony is at odds with her 911 call, and with the recollections of everyone else--from the amount of rain to the number of shots to the child begging for help.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #113 on: June 30, 2013, 11:10:14 AM »
BTW, NM, I believe Andrew Branca was talking about "court" because he wrote "testimony".

That wasn't in what you quoted. What you quoted said 'ever'.

Quote
No one but her has ever suggested that there was more than a single shot fired.

Offline Jujube

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #114 on: June 30, 2013, 11:42:48 AM »

1. The can in pocket with bag on ground indicates a sudden decision to stash the drink away when Zimmerman appeared a few feet in front of him.

I just gave this some thought and I thought of a few things that don't fit this scenario.  When George was on the NEN call, he did not say the guy was carrying a bag.  He did say that the guy had something in his waistband.  That implies that the can was already in the pocket. 

Offline Jujube

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #115 on: June 30, 2013, 11:49:10 AM »
Surdyka reported seeing two men wrestling on her 911 call, at a time when she had no other way of knowing they were there. Are you suggesting she couldn't really see them, and coincidentally hallucinated people who were actually there?

Surdyka reported one 'pop noise' on her 911 call. Everything on her 911 call is consistent with the other evidence.

Surdyka was the only one to report a Hispanic man was coming towards her after the event was over.  That matches up with other testimony and she was the only one who correctly labeled him Hispanic. 

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #116 on: June 30, 2013, 11:57:23 AM »
I just gave this some thought and I thought of a few things that don't fit this scenario.  When George was on the NEN call, he did not say the guy was carrying a bag.  He did say that the guy had something in his waistband.  That implies that the can was already in the pocket.

1:03:11: He's got his hand in his waistband.

1:15:52: He's got something in his hand.


Offline Jujube

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #117 on: June 30, 2013, 12:01:39 PM »
1:15:52: He's got something in his hand.

His phone? 

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #118 on: June 30, 2013, 12:14:45 PM »
His phone?

The point wasn't about what he had in his hand, it was to correct your misstatements.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Thoughts on Week One of Trial
« Reply #119 on: June 30, 2013, 12:20:48 PM »
I think we're commenting past each other again.

Zimmerman shot Martin about 7:16:56.

Surdyka connected with 911 about 10 seconds later, about 7:17:06.

About half a minute later, after giving her address, talking about screaming, and a single loud noise, which she called 'like a bang' and 'like a pop noise', she said 'And they're both still out there right now.'

Then she reported two people walking, apparently Manalo and Zimmerman, talking about them in a way that suggested that she understood that one of them had been involved in the incident, and the other had just come from a house and was approaching the location of the incident.

About 7:18:33, about a minute and a half after the gunshot, Surdyka told the dispatcher that she saw someone on the ground.

After another half minute, about 7:19:08, Surdyka reported that Manalo had reached Zimmerman, referring to Zimmerman as 'a man who had been wrestling'.

About 20 seconds later, 7:19:27, she told the dispatcher that the person she said was on the ground was lying 'in the grass'.

For this whole time, starting 10 seconds after the gunshot, Surdyka was on the phone with 911. She did not get another call that she put on 3-way, to give her information about what was happening outside. I know of no evidence that she had any source of information about these events except her own observations. All of her observations during this time, are corroborated by statements from Good, Manalo, Zimmerman, or some combination thereof.

I conclude that Surdyka was able to see the body of Trayvon Martin, horizontal on the ground, at a distance of some 80 feet or more. This is what I am talking about. Are you disputing this, or not?

 

Site Meter
click
tracking