@revelette,
revelette wrote:I think despite her obvious reluctance to be involved, her words to have a ring of truth to them because she is not censoring her words to be helpful to the prosecution
She's not censoring her words? That's not the impression I got. There was a passage in Jeantel's testimony where Trayvon Martin refers to his pursuer as a "nigga". The prosecutor follows up: "Excuse my language, but did Trayvon Martin use the word 'nigga'?". Jeantel says "yes" and explains: "it's slang." But there is a problem with the mike, so the prosecutor asks her to say the same thing again. Now she refers to the pursuer as "a man". No more mention of "nigga". So yes, Jeantel
does censor her language when uncensored language leads to uncomfortable follow-ups.
And that, I expect, will be exactly the defense's talking point: Rachel Jeantel isn't credible as a witness because she lies and changes her stories to get herself out of uncomfortable situations. Maybe she's not a compulsive liar, but she leaves us with reasonable doubts about her testimony. And on the bottom line, reasonable doubt is all it takes to exculpate Zimmerman.