TexasCHLforum.com

Dadtodabone wrote:CSM Meza, totally credible.

Absolutely .

Dadtodabone wrote:CSM Meza, totally credible.

I on the other hand HAVE heard such screams from a child and amongst all the other din I KNEW it was mine.

I sure wish we'd get to hear what happens in front of the judge's bench.

sjfcontrol wrote:I sure wish we'd get to hear what happens in front of the judge's bench.

Could your BP handle it?

Dragonfighter wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:I sure wish we'd get to hear what happens in front of the judge's bench.

Could your BP handle it?

Hmmm, you may have a point. Guess it's a good thing I don't have to participate in those conferences.

How do final arguments work? I'm guessing the prosecution goes first, followed by the defense, with no follow-up?

sjfcontrol wrote:How do final arguments work? I'm guessing the prosecution goes first, followed by the defense, with no follow-up?

No, the Florida Supreme Court change criminal procedure in capital cases, the prosecutors present their final arguments, the defense presents theirs and the prosecutors can rebut the defense arguments.

Dadtodabone wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:How do final arguments work? I'm guessing the prosecution goes first, followed by the defense, with no follow-up?

No, the Florida Supreme Court change criminal procedure in capital cases, the prosecutors present their final arguments, the defense presents theirs and the prosecutors can rebut the defense arguments.

With no rebuttal by the defense? That doesn't sound fair -- but then not much has in this case, anyway. Save it all for the appeal.

The defense can argue for a directed acquittal before closing their case. If the judge rejects that (which it seems she will - she rejects almost everything the defense asks for), it goes to the jury and who knows what happens?

baldeagle wrote:The defense can argue for a directed acquittal before closing their case. If the judge rejects that (which it seems she will - she rejects almost everything the defense asks for), it goes to the jury and who knows what happens?

She did that this afternoon. (Deny it, that is)

The medical examiner when he was doing the autopsy on TM was just doing another routine autopsy, a dime a dozen case, they probably stamp these out by the hundreds each year in Florida. Nobody knew at the time that this would be a big trial case. The pathologist would not remember this case more than any other case that he did considering it was not a celebrity murder case. Much of the work may not have even been done by the pathologist but by his assistant. Everyone thinks CSI but this was just another shooting-autopsy done without much reason to do anything fancy or even have the "chief" do the post-mortem. And really, except for the media and high profile people making it a Rodney King racial type case, this is just a nothing case except that Zimmerman has gotten screwed.

sjfcontrol wrote:

baldeagle wrote:The defense can argue for a directed acquittal before closing their case. If the judge rejects that (which it seems she will - she rejects almost everything the defense asks for), it goes to the jury and who knows what happens?

She did that this afternoon. (Deny it, that is)

I believe they get to ask again before they rest their case.

sjfcontrol wrote:

baldeagle wrote:The defense can argue for a directed acquittal before closing their case. If the judge rejects that (which it seems she will - she rejects almost everything the defense asks for), it goes to the jury and who knows what happens?

She did that this afternoon. (Deny it, that is)

You knew that was going to be denied.... no way she would stick her neck out regardless if it was right or wrong in this case. I am still wondering why the ME's opinion that Martin's marijuana usage could have effected his judgement isn't being allowed? Next week will be interesting. I think the prosecution dropped the ball. They should have ended their case with the mom and brother. Thanks to Dr. Bao aka the worst prosecution witness ever, they may not remember everything. Dr Bao will probably never be called to the stand again after today.

Does anyone know why TM's parents were allowed to stay in the courtroom prior to today, while GZ's parents were not? I thought GZ's parents were not allowed to stay because they were potential witnesses, yet TM's mom went on the stand this morning.

sjfcontrol wrote:

baldeagle wrote:The defense can argue for a directed acquittal before closing their case. If the judge rejects that (which it seems she will - she rejects almost everything the defense asks for), it goes to the jury and who knows what happens?

She did that this afternoon. (Deny it, that is)

Yes, of course, but the Judgement for Acquittal motion is heavily weighted in the prosecution's favor when the prosecution rests. It swings in the defense's favor when they rest, so they're much more likely to get an acquittal then than they were now. Almost no JOA's are approved mid-trial, or so the lawyers commenting on Legal Insurrection tell us.