@revelette,
Quote:After thinking about the trail, the defense is much better than the prosecution. They were able to get witnesses to either cross themselves up or admit certain occurrences could have happened. It was almost as though all these witnesses were for the defense rather than for the prosecution.
I agree, the defense has been very good at getting useful statements from these witnesses.
I didn't realize, until I heard a legal commentator on one of the talk shows, that in this type of case, where the defendant alleges self-defense, the prosecution is obligated to put certain witnesses on the stand, even if their testimony might weaken the state's case. The state can't eliminate those witnesses simply because their testimony might bolster the possibility of self defense--so they had to put the neighbor who described Martin throwing MMA style punches at Zimmerman on the stand, they really have no choice in that, otherwise they can be accused of concealing evidence favorable to the defendant's self-defense claim. The defense can pick and choose their witnesses with much more leeway than the state has in a case like this. Consequently, many of those prosecution witnesses will also wind up benefiting the defense, and the defense has taken good advantage of that.
After I understood that, I had a more favorable view of what the prosecution is doing.
The state's case will hinge on attacking Zimmerman's credibility. They have already shown he needlessly followed Martin, and that behavior was provocative because it made Martin apprehensive. And Zimmerman was the pursuer, Martin was trying to get away from him. Those things do not support a self-defense claim, they raise doubts about it. Zimmerman's injuries were relatively minor--he showed no evidence of having been beaten with repeated punches, nor did Martin's hands have evidence of having done that, nor did those hands show any DNA evidence that they had been placed over Zimmerman's mouth. That already contradicts Zimmerman's version of events. And the woman who had been on the phone with Martin did offer some evidence that Zimmerman was the aggressor and the one who provoked the actual confrontation and altercation. That suggests Zimmerman was behaving recklessly. So, little by little, the state is building its case.
The initial chief police investigator should be an important witness. He was apparently concerned about all the inconsistencies in Zimmerman's account immediately after the shooting.
There is no smoking gun in this case. We're never going to know exactly what happened just before the gunshot. But some scenarios are more credible than others based on the evidence. And we will just have to wait and listen to all of the evidence to see how it adds up.
Quote:
Zimmerman was not in reasonable fear for his life, he was simply getting the bad end of a butt whooping and shot Trayvon Martin. There was no reason to stalk Trayvon Martin and putting the whole tragic killing in motion
I agree with you about all of that. But that may add up to manslaughter.
Also, Zimmerman thought Martin was a criminal-type, and an adult, so maybe he had less hestitancy about pulling that trigger even if he didn't fear for his life. He certainly didn't seem overly concerned about the fact he had just killed someone after he had done it.
Quote:I feel Trayvon Martin is getting is getting lost in this trial
Well, the trial really is about Zimmerman and his actions.
Martin's parents sitting in that courtroom are constant reminders of Martin--that's why they are there.