Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I remember there being discussion here after the opening statements and West's bizarre knock-knock joke about the possibility that Zimmerman could get a new trial based on an inadequate defense by his defense team.
Too bad the State won't have the same option.
This witness sure likes to embellish: "wild eyed," etc.
Yes. His demeanor is a bit bizarre given the seriousness of this situation. I am thinking that will possibly make the jurors wonder how He and George banter about this case over a beer on the patio....Perhaps it will be believeable that George....behaving like a robot throughout the trial, his "flat affect"....is purely acting.... deceptive. This is George's best friend afterall...
And the person that Trayvon Martin made that remark about proved to be "creepy" AND a murderer so Trayvon's instincts were right about GZ. TM fought for his life.
Prosecution called him because he certainly would have been called by defense. They get first crack at him, and my guess is a lot more liberty in their questioning.
I think letting him ramble on is a strategy.....I think he is elaborating plenty....and George's words in his previous tapings are not as elaborative...it may come back to hurt George.
George already clarified in the second interview w/ lead investigator...That Trayvon didn't fully circle his car.
Couldn't have been called by the defense to say what Zimmerman told him. That would have been excluded because it's considered self-serving statements by Zimmerman. So if the prosecution had not called him he would not been able to tell all these things that Zimmerman told him. Truly bizarre that the prosecution called him and now has him telling all of these things that help Zimmerman. Maybe there is something else they expect to get from him that we haven't seen yet. If so, it better be good to make up for all of this.
He left "m.f." out of the book because it's "pornographic?"
I don't know why this guy would have been a prosecution witness - "he's (Zimmerman) the best friend I ever had."
I agree. Seems like an odd witness for the prosecution to call. Unless there is something really incriminating in the book, and I haven't heard it. Problem is (for the pros), he's a compelling witness. Speaks clearly, answers questions clearly and IMO comes across as believable. Seems like a better witness for the defense, unless there's a real "gotcha" there somewhere.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
