George Zimmerman Trial Coverage > Trial Expectations

Closing Argument Expectations

(1/3) > >>

TalkLeft:
What do you expect each side to stress in closing arguments?

O'Mara said on TV Wednesday night that he would argue to the jury to focus on murder 2 and self defense. He wants it to be all or nothing -- either self-defense or murder 2. He is also concerned about a compromise verdict based on sympathy for the Martin family.

He will use his computer animation in closing.

I think the state has to be careful not to misstate the evidence. If it starts throwing out possibilities, I think that's as good as conceding reasonable doubt. It has to argue why its evidence both proves ill will hatred, etc. and disproves self-defense.

Since there can be no conviction on either murder 2 or manslaughter if the jury finds justifiable homicide, I expect it will focus more on  defeating self-defense than proving ill will. The penalties are sky high for manslaughter so it really shouldn't matter to them which one the jury picks. It just doesn't want to come up empty handed.

I wonder how it will address Rachel Jeantel in closing.

RickyJim:
I am pretty sure it is appropriate to bring this up now.  Here is a list of some of the "contradictions" and other potentially problematic statements by Zimmerman that the prosecution may highlight in its closing arguments.

* Reason for not returning to car after saying "Okay" to dispatcher was to look for a streetsign/address.
* Claiming he returned right away to his car when the NEN call ended
* Having no regrets about getting out of his car (Hannity).
* Not knowing what he did to annoy Trayvon Martin.
* Saying Martin called him "homie".
* Saying originally that when punched at the T he fell down backwards and was mounted by Martin.
* Claiming to have his head repeatedly banged into the concrete.
* Claiming that Martin put his hand over Zimmerman's mouth to smother him.
* Claiming that Martin said "You got me" when shot".  Too Hollywood.

nomatter_nevermind:
8:20 AM on 7/12.

Tweet from Dana Chabaan says defense has brought a piece of concrete into court for use a demonstrative exhibit.

TalkLeft:

--- Quote from: RickyJim on July 11, 2013, 07:38:50 AM ---I am pretty sure it is appropriate to bring this up now.  Here is a list of some of the "contradictions" and other potentially problematic statements by Zimmerman that the prosecution may highlight in its closing arguments.
--- End quote ---

Several of those statements are more accurate than not. also, no one has perfect recall after a traumatic event. If that's all they have, I don't think it helps their case. If Zimmerman had the burden of proof,  his credibility might be more important. But the burden is on the state and Zimmerman's version has been overall consistent, and more importantly, it's supported in the most critical aspects by other witnesses.

Usually it's the defendant poking holes in the state's case. The closings have both been about poking holes in Zimmerman's defense. It needs way more than that.

RickyJim:
I keep on telling Yman on the main TL site and Susan Simpson on her site that you can ignore all of Zimmerman's statements and have plenty of reasonable doubt about his guilt.  They keep replying no, no, no, they jury will regard Zimmerman's credibility as all important in assessing his self defense claim.  Of course talking heads, like Marcia Clark, have said the same thing on TV.  Didn't Guy ask a question today like, "Why would he lie if he weren't guilty?".  I don't attempt to explain all misstatements as due to trauma.  I think his desire to make his self defense case more believable, boost his self image and being in denial about the objective foolishness of some of his actions, also have something to do with it.  I can't understand why some people think that means I think he is guilty.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version