Author Topic: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13  (Read 4858 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lousy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Rate Post +6/-30
  • Fetch my hammer
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #30 on: July 08, 2013, 06:07:44 PM »
Here his son (presumably) scream for help and get shot, over and over again?


IMO Bernie is a contemptuous twerp . I wonder how the jury is warming to him. If I had been en-paneled the first juror to be exit  would have been dismissed  for shooting paper wads at him.

Offline teresainpa

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #31 on: July 08, 2013, 06:21:00 PM »

IMO Bernie is a contemptuous twerp . I wonder how the jury is warming to him. If I had been en-paneled the first juror to be exit  would have been dismissed  for shooting paper wads at him.
Hitting the bald dude with spit balls?  I can see that  8)

Offline ding7777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Rate Post +19/-59
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #32 on: July 08, 2013, 06:32:12 PM »
If there is conflicting testimony re the screams, is the jury told to resolve it in favor of the defendant or are they told to come to their own conclusion?

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #33 on: July 08, 2013, 06:33:00 PM »
I wonder if there are limitations on the voice ID witnesses the state can put on in rebuttal. I can see why they might be allowed to attempt to "even out" the score of voice witnesses, but it doesn't seem like it's, strictly speaking, rebuttal evidence.  The issue was not first brought up in the defense case. The state presented Sybrina in their direct case almost exclusively to say it was TM screaming. They could have put on additional witnesses, had they chosen to do so. Presenting more voice ID witnesses is really a continuation of their direct case.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #34 on: July 08, 2013, 06:44:11 PM »
If there is conflicting testimony re the screams, is the jury told to resolve it in favor of the defendant or are they told to come to their own conclusion?

Somewhere in here is a "close enough for now" version of the instructions given to the jury.  Essentially, the jury is charged with coming to its own conclusion.  It is empowered to weigh the evidence (which accounts for witness credibility, as well as how important any given piece of evidence is), and it is told which way to lean when it is uncertain.

If the jury is uncertain about the scream, and the case turns on the scream, it (is supposed to) find defendant not guilty.

Offline Lousy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Rate Post +6/-30
  • Fetch my hammer
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #35 on: July 08, 2013, 06:48:36 PM »
T
I wonder if there are limitations on the voice ID witnesses the state can put on in rebuttal. I can see why they might be allowed to attempt to "even out" the score of voice witnesses, but it doesn't seem like it's, strictly speaking, rebuttal evidence.  The issue was not first brought up in the defense case. The state presented Sybrina in their direct case almost exclusively to say it was TM screaming. They could have put on additional witnesses, had they chosen to do so. Presenting more voice ID witnesses is really a continuation of their direct case.

I don't think its an accident that the state  declined to present additional favorable voice witnesses during their presentation. How could they do so without opening the door to  TM's serious behavioral issues on rebuttal?

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #36 on: July 09, 2013, 01:21:12 AM »
How could they do so without opening the door to  TM's serious behavioral issues on rebuttal?

Would you want to unpack this? I don't understand what you have in mind.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1125
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Tracy Martin, 7/8/13
« Reply #37 on: July 09, 2013, 01:40:04 AM »
Here is the video of Crump saying the police lied about what Tracy said, that he told them he couldn't tell because the tape was distorted, and now that he'd had a chance to listen to cleaned up versions he could ID the voice. Only there were no cleaned up versions. O'Mara filed a motion to get them and BDLR told the court there weren't any.  In another appearance, Crump played up the difference to Tracy having been able to listen on a computer at the mayor's office, as opposed to on Serino's dinky player.

I remember a video in which Tracy talked about why he didn't ID the voice but I haven't been able to find it today. I'll keep looking.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking