State pushes to keep Trayvon Martin's past out of George Zimmerman trial

zimmerman had no way of knowing this even if it matters, which it does not.

The six jurors who will decide George Zimmerman's fate have been chosen, and they are all women. The four alternate jurors consist of two women and two men.

Opening statements are scheduled for Monday morning at 9 a.m. ET.

The jury was selected Thursday afternoon after defense attorney Mark O'Mara completed his question-and-answer session with the potential jurors.

Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, on the night of February 26, 2012. He claims he shot the teenager in self-defense.

Judge Debra Nelson asked Zimmerman if he agreed with the jurors selected to serve on the panel, and he said he did. Nelson then dismissed the other potential jurors who were not selected.

Attorney O'Mara began the day by explaining the definition of reasonable doubt to the jury pool. He said it’s a complicated concept that even "third-year law students" can have difficulty understanding.

O’Mara questioned the 40 potential jurors about a variety of topics, including their beliefs about gun ownership and their thoughts on self-defense.

O’Mara pointed out that Florida law states that there is no duty to retreat when being threatened, but Judge Debra Nelson admonished O’Mara, saying she did not want the attorneys interpreting the law for the jurors. Nelson then read to the jury the strict definition of justifiable homicide that they must consider during deliberations.

Justifiable homicide is a killing where no criminal liability can result, such as when someone acts in self-defense to protect himself or another person.

O’Mara finished his questioning of the jury before Nelson broke for lunch. When court resumed Thursday afternoon, the attorneys began the process of whittling down jury pool to the six jurors and the four alternates needed for the trial.

Both sides had the chance to keep or strike jurors. Each side had 10 peremptory strikes -- 10 opportunities to eliminate potential jurors without having to disclose their reasons -- and an unlimited number of strikes “for cause,” for such reasons as bias or hardships.

Later today, attorneys will resume the hearing to decide the admissibility of technology used to analyze the screams on a 911 call from the night of the shooting.

The technology may be key to the prosecution’s case, because their experts’ testimony may be able to shed light on what was said between Zimmerman and Martin moments before the teenager was shot.

If the analysis indicates Martin screamed for help, it could hurt the credibility of Zimmerman's claim that he acted in self-defense.

The law states that for technology to be admissible, it must be “generally accepted” in that particular field. Zimmerman’s attorneys are arguing the technology does not satisfy that threshold.

On June 6, defense expert Hirotaka Nakasone, an audio engineer for the FBI, expressed his doubts about using the recordings.

"A screaming voice is too far for us to address," Nakasone said. "It might mislead in the worst case."

Attorney O'Mara began the day by explaining the definition of reasonable doubt to the jury pool. He said it’s a complicated concept that even "third-year law students" can have difficulty understanding.

When opening statements in George Zimmerman's trial begin Monday, prosecutors are free to use words such as "vigilante" and characterize Zimmerman's actions before his fatal confrontation with Trayvon Martin as "profiling," the judge ruled Friday.

The defense had sought to bar the phrases, labeling them as "defamatory."

“If they [prosecutors] don’t prove it, they don’t prove it,” Judge Debra Nelson. “That’s the state’s case.”

Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Martin in Sanford, Florida, on Feb. 26, 2012. He claims he shot the teenager in self-defense.

Zimmerman’s defense attorneys had wanted Nelson to prohibit the following descriptors of Zimmerman, saying that they were disparaging:
•"Racially profiled" (or any variation)
•"Vigilante"
•"Self-appointed neighborhood watch captain"
•"Wannabe cop"
•"He got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to"
•"He confronted Trayvon Martin"

Nelson said she would allow the prosecution to use these terms, because these terms amount to the prosecutor’s case against Zimmerman.

However, Nelson did add one caveat that may help the defense. Prosecutors cannot say Zimmerman profiled Martin based solely on race, but can include other factors such as age.

Nelson said she will try to make a ruling later Friday or possibly over the weekend on the admissibility of technology used to analyze the screams on a 911 call from the night of the shooting. Court proceedings began Friday at 9 a.m. ET to handle any outstanding issues before opening statements begin Monday.

The technology may be key to the prosecution’s case, because their experts’ testimony may be able to shed light on what was said between Zimmerman and Martin moments before the teenager was shot.

If the analysis indicates Martin screamed for help, it could hurt the credibility of Zimmerman's claim that he acted in self-defense.

The law states that, for technology to be admissible, it must be “generally accepted” in the particular field it's applied to. Zimmerman’s attorneys are arguing the technology does not satisfy that threshold.

On June 6, defense expert Hirotaka Nakasone, an audio engineer for the FBI, expressed his doubts about using the recordings.

"A screaming voice is too far for us to address," Nakasone said. "It might mislead in the worst case."

Opening statements in Zimmerman’s trial are scheduled for 9 a.m. ET Monday morning.

That ruling, on the audio, is supposed to come today, revelette.

If you miss the opening statements on Monday, I'm sure HLN will be replaying them in the evening. The other cable channels will also re-play at least portions of them.

I hope your surgery goes well

I'm still surprised at how hard so many people tried to sabotage justice in this trial.

It was pretty damn relevant.

Though it wouldn't be conclusive by any means, a known history of violence and fighting by a person who is accused to have confronted and attacked is an important piece of information about the case.