Justice for Zimmerman

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Status
Not open for further replies.
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
Maybe the all the lawyers met for drinks before the trial. They realized that this case is pretty crap and everyone is just bored as hell. So they agreed to do the old switcheroo, where the prosecution would argue the defense's case, and the defense would argue the prosecutions.

Those guys. So zany.

Or maybe this is some kind of meta-critique of the justice system itself. Deep. Courageous.
 
A

azeth

6,216
8
"i dont believe the detective played each call in its entirety"

Of course he didnt.. he wanted your honest opinion on who was screaming, so he played the screams.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
The father did not even know his son was missing until his son had been dead long enough for the autopsy to take place.

This guy was not even aware that the man shot roughly 150 yards from his own front door was his son, it was over a day after Martin was dead before his father reported him missing.
 
Siliconemelons

Siliconemelons

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
11,874
17,836
Why did they call him... its just more and more emotion for the jury- and the way they are asking the questions- they are letting the father say "it was my son" after his statement was given "no" or "I don't know" all by the way they are asking the question. Should not have even called him up...
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,426
49,042
xadion_sl said:
Why did they call him... its just more and more emotion for the jury- and the way they are asking the questions- they are letting the father say "it was my son" after his statement was given "no" or "I don't know" all by the way they are asking the question. Should not have even called him up...
Click to expand...
Yea unless something comes out that I didn't know before, I don't know why they called the dad.
 
vGrade

vGrade

Potato del Grande
1,759
2,737
OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED OVER RULED
 
Bows

Bows

Golden Knight of the Realm
102
-910
xadion_sl said:
Why did they call him... its just more and more emotion for the jury- and the way they are asking the questions- they are letting the father say "it was my son" after his statement was given "no" or "I don't know" all by the way they are asking the question. Should not have even called him up...
Click to expand...
I think 2 reasons they called him, #1 now he is calling 2 different police officers liars, or atleast somewhat contradicting their testimony, and #2 the defense asked him about a cleaned up version of the call and if he had heard a tape or anything else like that, they deposed Ben Crump last night, my guess is they already have that answer and just caught Tracy Martin in a lie.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,426
49,042
Bows_sl said:
I think 2 reasons they called him, #1 now he is calling 2 different police officers liars, or atleast somewhat contradicting their testimony, and #2 the defense asked him about a cleaned up version of the call and if he had heard a tape or anything else like that, they deposed Ben Crump last night, my guess is they already have that answer and just caught Tracy Martin in a lie.
Click to expand...
Or Ben Crump lied...
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
I wish they would stop with this "recognizing the voice" bullshit. Power of suggestion plays a much, much larger role than actually being able to discern whose screaming voice you can hear in the background of a muffled phone recording.
Are lawyers just trained to make big deals about things that don't matter at all?
 
Siliconemelons

Siliconemelons

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
11,874
17,836
Bows_sl said:
I think 2 reasons they called him, #1 now he is calling 2 different police officers liars, or atleast somewhat contradicting their testimony, and #2 the defense asked him about a cleaned up version of the call and if he had heard a tape or anything else like that, they deposed Ben Crump last night, my guess is they already have that answer and just caught Tracy Martin in a lie.
Click to expand...
Yes, but its getting that clearly conveyed to the Jury... who are all women...

All they heard was "poor dad had to hear his son die!" and not any of those other things will matter.
 
Siliconemelons

Siliconemelons

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
11,874
17,836
Tanoomba_sl said:
I wish they would stop with this "recognizing the voice" bullshit. Power of suggestion plays a much, much larger role than actually being able to discern whose screaming voice you can hear in the background of a muffled phone recording.
Are lawyers just trained to make big deals about things that don't matter at all?
Click to expand...
Yes
 
D

Darshu_sl

shitlord
235
0
I'm predicting it now... the next witness is going to be a psychic that is going to summon the ghost of Trayvon to testify.
 
Intrinsic

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
15,032
13,125
Is the lawyer's sole purpose in life to ask questions in the most confusing way possible? "Is it your understanding that given your training that the decision was made when allowing the tape to be listened to, to the parties, that best practices allowed multiple parties to be present and based on those best practices related to your training that time in which you were still Chief of Police that you came out of retirement to take but were actually in the Sheriff's department, that the playing of the recording to the multiple parties took place in the Mayor's office in which you were in the building but not in the room? Is that correct?"
 
N

Numbers_sl

shitlord
4,054
3
Language matters in a court of law. If you read court decisions you can see the painstaking way in which judges write.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Intrinsic_sl said:
Is the lawyer's sole purpose in life to ask questions in the most confusing way possible? "Is it your understanding that given your training that the decision was made when allowing the tape to be listened to, to the parties, that best practices allowed multiple parties to be present and based on those best practices related to your training that time in which you were still Chief of Police that you came out of retirement to take but were actually in the Sheriff's department, that the playing of the recording to the multiple parties took place in the Mayor's office in which you were in the building but not in the room? Is that correct?"
Click to expand...
And even if the person being asked understands the question, who's to say whether everyone in the jury can make heads or tails of questions like this? Seems pretty counter-intuitive.
 
F

foddon

Silver Knight of the Realm
747
5
Wow, how could the prosecution not ask the trainer guy about the mechanics of getting a gun out of a hidden waist holster while mounted???
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,426
49,042
Tanoomba_sl said:
And even if the person being asked understands the question, who's to say whether everyone in the jury can make heads or tails of questions like this? Seems pretty counter-intuitive.
Click to expand...
The time to distill it down for the jury (if you were unable to do so on cross/direct) is in closing.
 
Ignatius

Ignatius

#thePewPewLife
4,760
6,398
Cad, can you explain what is going on right now? It sounds like the Prosecution is asking for more time based on an error they found in their cross examination?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.