Author Topic: State's First Closing Argument  (Read 13581 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline redstripe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #120 on: July 11, 2013, 07:44:50 PM »
De la Rionda, the assistant state attorney in the Fourth Judicial Circuit of Florida, is the lead prosecutor in the Zimmerman trial. Originally from Cuba, de la Rionda was stowed on a cargo plane by his parents to escape the Communist country when he was 4 years old. He was raised in the United States by his grandparents.

De la Rionda has almost 30 years of experience and has more than 250 trials -- including many homicide cases -- under his belt. De la Rionda was honored in 2010 with the “Director’s Community Leadership Award" by the FBI. When presenting the award, the FBI spoke about de la Rionda’s “legendary” reputation as an exceptional prosecutor.
And this from the FBI:

BTW, he's sent more black people to death row than any other prosecutor. Just ironic.

Certainly he's done very well for himself and gotten a lot of convictions, but I'd be willing to bet that most of those 250 trials were against low income defendants with inadequate legal representation. The death penalty thing's also interesting to say the least, but I guess he was doing his part to help Florida stay in the running with Texas for most executions.

Offline Lousy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Rate Post +6/-30
  • Fetch my hammer
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #121 on: July 11, 2013, 07:48:37 PM »
Here's a real whopper.  "We wanted to tell you all the evidence. We wanted to put in all the witnesses that saw something of value out there because we wanted you to get the truth. We wanted you to get the complete story."

CNN has transcripts, if anybody wants to scour them carefully.

Don't forget the diatribe about Zimmerman supposedly claiming that he didn't know that he shot TM. Based I guess on his discussion with Serino? when he was informed that TM was dead,

As I recall from BDLR - "why did he holster his gun if he didn't know that he shot the scary teenager?"

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #122 on: July 11, 2013, 09:00:59 PM »
One was when he claimed GZ said "call my wife and tell her I killed him". Another was the one I brought up, where he claimed there was no evidence Trayvon was a fighter.

Greta Van Susteren was talking about this on her show. She thought O'Mara should have objected immediately. I disagree. O'Mara will bring it up in his closing. He'll shove it down BDLR's throat in a way he couldn't do with an objection in court which prohibits speaking objections.

Offline Meni

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #123 on: July 11, 2013, 09:37:45 PM »
Good point. Although I think many of BDLR's 'misstatements' were deliberate. No one can be that dumb

I thought they were deliberate-
deliberate uncertainties.


Offline Meni

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #124 on: July 11, 2013, 09:43:43 PM »
  ???  You mean coming up with some real evidence?  What is there to clean up?  Not do the opening with F bombs?

Lol.
If Bernie gets a do-over he may want to omit suggesting that Martin was not armed with fists and concrete, but that he was armed with skittles.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #125 on: July 11, 2013, 10:12:08 PM »
Don't forget the diatribe about Zimmerman supposedly claiming that he didn't know that he shot TM. Based I guess on his discussion with Serino? when he was informed that TM was dead,

Reenactment, 10:39-51
Quote
Zimmerman: And I didn't think I hit him, because he sat up, and he said "Ugh, you got me." "You got it," "You got me," "You got it," something like that. So I thought he was just saying, "I know you have a gun now, I heard it, I'm giving up."

Offline jjr495

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #126 on: July 11, 2013, 10:47:21 PM »
BDLR made a big deal today about the bigger flashlight, the button, the string on TM's hoodie being pulled, and the angle of the blood running down the back of GZ's head. Watch from about 2 minutes in. BDLR says all these things are important but doesn't really explain why.  I expect Guy will pull out some big demonstration of how all these fit together.

Offline Meni

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #127 on: July 11, 2013, 10:50:54 PM »
BDLR made a big deal today about the bigger flashlight, the button, the string on TM's hoodie being pulled, and the angle of the blood running down the back of GZ's head. Watch from about 2 minutes in. BDLR says all these things are important but doesn't really explain why.  I expect Guy will pull out some big demonstration of how all these fit together.

And the button Martin was wearing?
Bernie asked Sybrina to identify it on the stand and then we never heard of it again.

Offline jjr495

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #128 on: July 11, 2013, 11:00:10 PM »
And the button Martin was wearing?
Bernie asked Sybrina to identify it on the stand and then we never heard of it again.
BDLR said the hoodie was large and the weight of the button some how created separation of the clothes from the skin. Without further elaboration, all of this will not be registered as important by the jury. Thus, my guess that Guy will provide the explanation.

Offline jjr495

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #129 on: July 11, 2013, 11:04:33 PM »
BDLR said the hoodie was large and the weight of the button some how created separation of the clothes from the skin. Without further elaboration, all of this will not be registered as important by the jury. Thus, my guess that Guy will provide the explanation.
Perhaps Guy will say that GZ pulled on the hoodie string and that, with the weight of the button, somehow created separation? Does anyone know which side of the hoodie string was pulled. I am guessing TM's right.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 11:07:37 PM by jjr495 »

Offline jjr495

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #130 on: July 11, 2013, 11:18:39 PM »
As I recall, Jon Good testified that he thought the scream voice remained the same after he went in to call 911. If the State is going to argue some kind of switch in positions, it would be good to remind them of Good.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #131 on: July 12, 2013, 02:56:00 AM »
Below are a list of what I believe to be factual misstatements in de la Rionda's closing argument, up to the break.

CNN Transcripts

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3 

First I want to mention three things that aren't strictly factual misstatements, but that I think will hurt the state's credibility with the jurors.

Quote
[TM] is dead through no fault of his own.

The state didn't come close to proving this, in the face of considerable contrary evidence. It's one of the first things Bernie said.

Quote
Recall one of the questions that was asked of Investigator Serino by the defense. "Sir, if you were driving by and somebody was in the front yard and looking through a window, wouldn't you stop your car and kind of investigate that"? His first -- my recollection is that his comment was, his answer was, "I would think maybe he lives there."

As I recall that's an accurate description of Serino's testimony. But GZ said more than once that he knew who lived at 1460 RVC.

Quote
If the police had gotten called out there . . . under the law, they're allowed to ask somebody that's walking the streets. The person can ignore them or not.

That's funny. Try it sometime, Bernie. Try ignoring a cop who thought you were suspicious and asked you a question. You'll be in his patrol car on the way to the station so fast you're head will spin.

Of course he's correct to make the lawyer's point that you haven't committed a crime. But they can hold you overnight for being 'suspicious', I think longer in some jurisdictions. That's not easy to ignore.

Now, as to facts.

Quote
And then apparently Mr. Manalo was taking too long or something and he said, "Just tell her I killed him," just kind of matter of fact.

Quote
He calls 911 non-emergency.

Bernie has been using this meme throughout the trial. I meant to comment on it the first time he said it, but I didn't get around to it. The non-emergency number does't have '911' in it. There is no such thing as '911 non-emergency'.

Quote
What's ironic in this case and what I want to spend some time talking with you about is the defendant's statements because you might think, well, hold on, you're the state, what are you putting on his self- serving statements when he's denying committing a crime, when he's saying it's self-defense? We wanted to tell you all the evidence.

The state actually withheld one of GZ's statements, the preliminary interview before the CVSA test.

Quote
But what does she say before the actual recording, before she called the police, she heard something going on out there. Because, see, this wasn't like the defendant claims that out of the blue the victim just kind of attacked him and knocked him to the ground and he just started beating him. No, this started, I would submit, further down, but it didn't start right at the "T" where the defendant claims it occurred.

GZ reported three sentences passing between him and TM, consistent with Lauer's statement. Lauer put the starting location north of her house and west of the T, also consistent with GZ's statements.

Btw, we haven't heard any more about Lauer's twitter.

Quote
[Y]ou've got to assume that then the victim just hit him and knocked him to the ground and just started beating him and -- and poor defendant, poor George Zimmerman, he just kind of took it, boom, boom, just getting whacked over and over.

He never did anything.

GZ said that he tried to push TM away, between the first punch and the struggle going to ground. Then he yelled for help and tried to sit up. He struggled to get his head off the concrete. When he was being suffocated, he tried to push TM's hands away. That is GZ's story, not that he 'never did anything'. 

Quote
Ironically, of the two, one of the individuals is the one that's had, what, 18 months MMA fighting?

My recollection of the testimony is that GZ got elementary training in at least two 'martial arts', boxing and 'grappling'. (I don't know how the latter differs from wrestling, if at all.) Adam Pollock testified that he was never allowed into the ring for boxing, much less for an actual MMA fight, in which techniques from a wide variety of martial arts are permitted.

Quote
The defendant claims at the very end, right before, unfortunately, he had to shoot the victim, that the victim grabbed the gun.

Claims? Present tense? GZ didn't testify to that. Even taking Mark Osterman's recollection at face value, it was over a year ago that GZ may have said that to him.

Quote
What the defendant told Mr. Osterman not, like, a month later, that same evening meaning the morning after when he picked him up at the police station and drove him to his house. That he -- the victim had grabbed the gun. Not the holster, grabbed the gun.

My recollection is that Osterman testified that he couldn't remember if it was the gun or the holster.

Quote
[R]ecall even the defendant from the defendant's own mouth, they always got away from this exit over here, this other exit.

I don't think it is in evidence that GZ said that.

Quote
Defendant claims that Trayvon Martin is the strongest guy in the world because he grabbed him, picked him up, then transported him, what, 20 yards?

GZ didn't say TM picked him up or 'transported' him.

The '20 yards' is complicated. First, I think the distance between the T and TM's body was between 40 and 50 feet, not close to 60. But GZ didn't say the struggle went even that far before going to ground. In the reenactment, GZ indicated a point maybe halfway or maybe a little more that halfway from the T to the shooting site (8:14).

I haven't wrestled since high school gym class. I recall often being surprised to find myself at the edge of the ring. I think GZ never realized that the struggle migrated across the ground.

In any case, I think Bernie's '20 yards' is wrong twice, both as an estimate of the distance from T to body, and egregiously so as representing GZ's statement.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2013, 02:58:31 AM by nomatter_nevermind »

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #132 on: July 12, 2013, 06:22:23 AM »
Perhaps Guy will say that GZ pulled on the hoodie string and that, with the weight of the button, somehow created separation? Does anyone know which side of the hoodie string was pulled. I am guessing TM's right.

Except expert testimony establishes that there wasn't a pull to either side because that would've thrown off the alignment of the bullet holes.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: State's First Closing Argument
« Reply #133 on: July 12, 2013, 06:33:03 AM »
As I recall, Jon Good testified that he thought the scream voice remained the same after he went in to call 911. If the State is going to argue some kind of switch in positions, it would be good to remind them of Good.
I hope you can find the exact quote.  Good testified about a diagram he drew for FDLE that showed first M and Z were perpendicular to him with M's back towards Good and then they moved onto the sidewalk with M facing to Good's left, Z to the right.  Both positions had M on top of and straddling Z who was on his back.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking