HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Has Zimmerman's lawyer al...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 12:51 PM

Has Zimmerman's lawyer already cooked his case?

Especially given the prosecution's strong opeing statement.

12 replies, 1696 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 12:53 PM

1. That would have been funny immediately after jury selection, but part of his opening arguments?

Let's take up a collection and buy him a clue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 12:59 PM

3. wow! How damned offensive can he be--given, I'm sure the jury fully recognizes

both the seriousness of the case and their own sacrifice in being sequestered for the duration.

That was just damned stupid and callous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 12:59 PM

2. Zimmys lawyer doesnt seem all there to me.

He seems he's going in circles and he's not focused at all. I'm not sure what to make of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 01:07 PM

4. his only hope is jury nullification

of the kind that kept the killers of medgar evers (and many others) free for over 40 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 01:18 PM

5. It's bad alright

but there is a lot more to come.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 01:24 PM

6. His lawyer is uptight and boring.

He is so uptight in his body language and facial expressions he gives me the creeps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 01:37 PM

7. Great lawyer you got there Zimmy.......

Can he gargle peanut butter as well ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 02:30 PM

8. What a stunningly patronizing asshole. I think Zim's going to be doin' some well-deserved "time" ~nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 06:04 PM

9. Essentially telling the jury...

"you got selected because you're ignorant" in the form of joke, in your opening statement, is a sure sign of some Serious Defense Lawyering going on. It's always best to insult the people sitting in judgement of you...

I think they've laid the foundation for Zimmerman's appeal on opening statement. That has to be some kind of record...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 06:26 PM

10. Short Answer, Yes

But I have a reason different from the stupid knock-knock joke.

I think the defense made a mistake by claiming incompetence on the part of the forensic team by claiming they must have cleaned up Martin's hands before examining them for blood. I have said that since Martin had his cell in one hand and the bag with iced tea and skittles in the other he probably hit Zimmerman in the face with the bag rather than a punch after Zimmerman's inflammatory response to Martin asking "why are you following me". That would explain no blood or bruises on Martin's hands. No blood also undermines the defense on Martin being on top of Zimmerman slamming his bloody head in the ground so that leaves the defense with having to attack the forensic team for incompetence. Along with the bad knock-knock joke, I would say that the defense has not gotten off to a very good start. Remember, there is no disputing that George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin. That will, of course, be laid out in the trial but it is open and shut so it is Zimmerman who must prove that it was self-defense and that requires evidence rather than speculation on what could have happened. Zimmerman has several significant obstacles in proving that and no blood or bruises on Martin's hands is one such major evidentiary obstacle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Mon Jun 24, 2013, 06:33 PM

11. If you have to preface something with 'at considerable risk let me say' the thing you are about to

say better be a damn sight more important than a fucking idiotic knock knock joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1monster (Original post)

Tue Jun 25, 2013, 02:01 PM

12. Could have been worse. He was going to start with a rendition of "Who's On First?" nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread