Cardinal Fang

Um, what?

The Zimmermans really need to get their story straight. First banging head on the concrete, now he couldn't breathe? If I'm a juror, and I have heard the tape with screaming right up until the very second the shot is heard, and then the defendant says he couldn't breathe, I'm saying, Dude, if you couldn't breathe, how could you scream?

NYMomof2

The Z relatives seemed at one point to be advancing a story that Trayvon was going for Z's gun, thereby forcing him to shoot. There were variants of the story proposed, but would any stories told by surrogates matter? Wouldn't the trial only use the story that Z gave to the police right after the shooting?

07DAD

Think Casey Anthony. "Surrogates" get stuff into the media. Like George A was abusive. Nothing about that was in the trial testimony. But, at least one juror indicated that there was a real dislike for and lack of belief in George A.

Media frenzy and "we'll report anything and interview anyone" has really made any search "for the truth" in a trial much more difficult.

Cardinal Fang

Can the prosecution bring into evidence differing stories that Zimmerman told his surrogates along the way? Seems like they should be able to, to show that he didn't have a consistent story of what happened that night.

Seems like if the prosecution wants to paint Zimmerman as a liar, they should be allowed to present evidence that he told differing stories about the events of the night in question.

poetgrl

07 isn't there something called hearsay evidence?

Does it matter what other people "say" Z "said?"

Except if he was being deposed, I thought it was immaterial. Correct me if I'm wrong, which I'm half sure I am.

07DAD

poetgrl--Unless Z testifies, it is a surmise whether Z in fact told a surrogate anything.

Witness examination outside the presence of the jurors. "Didn't Z tell you _______?" "Well, no I actually did not get this straight from Z. I thought I heard someone say that probably ---------." Hearsay objection sustained.

poetgrl

Okay, so if his family runs around saying all sorts of things, it does not become "evidence" that he himself was lying? This is what I am assuming.

Once the trial begins, then the jurors are only able to consider the evidence actually admitted into the trial. Right?

That's what happened with the Casey Anthony trial, imho. When I watched it, and only listened to what was being allowed as evidence, I did "see" how they could acquit. So, we should not assume that everything we have heard will even be a part of the evidence.

I predict they will get manslaughter unless there are forensics which decimate Z's defense, which there could well be. I think only forensics will get them Murder2.

NYMomof2

Maybe I'm being too trusting, but I got the impression that both the prosecutor and the defense lawyer are trying to do the right thing. Clearly, they are on different sides, and it is the job of the defense lawyer to present evidence and interpretation that is most favorable to Z, but I don't think he is going to do anything dishonorable, like try to trash Trayvon's reputation and imply that he "deserved" to be shot. Similarly, I don't think the prosecutor is going to try to get Z convicted of something she doesn't believe that he did.

07DAD

This is off Pam Bondi's website. Bondi is the Florida Attorney General.

An Overview of the Legal System
The process begins when a victim, or one having knowledge of a crime, files a sworn statement with the proper authority known as a complaint. Once a complaint has been investigated, and the complaint is found to have probable cause, a crime can be charged either by information or indictment. An information is a sworn document signed by the prosecuting authority (in this case the Office of Statewide Prosecution) which charges a person with the a violation of the law. An information may charge any crime except a crime punishable by death.

An indictment is a charging document filed by a grand jury and may indict on any crime. A grand jury consists of 18 citizens who hear allegations and evidence brought before them by the prosecuting authority and decide who, if anyone, should be charged with what crime(s). If a defendant is held on a complaint and an information or indictment is not filed within 21 days, he/she may demand an adversary preliminary hearing. At an adversary preliminary hearing, evidence is presented and witnesses are questioned. The judge then makes a determination whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and that the defendant committed it, in order to further detain the defendant.

Within 24 hours of his/her arrest the accused criminal, known as the "defendant" is brought before the judge for first appearance. At this hearing the judge informs the defendant of the charges against him/her, advises the defendant of his/her right to counsel, and explains the amount of bond.

If the defendant is not able to post the bail initially set by the judge, he/she may request a bond hearing at any time. At a bond hearing the judge considers the nature and circumstances of the case, the weight of the evidence against the defendant, the risk of danger to the community, and the defendant's prior record and ties to the community. The judge then determines whether a lower bond amount will ensure the defendant's appearance at further court proceedings and protect the community from unreasonable danger.

After filing an information or indictment the defendant is next entitled to an arraignment, whereby the defendant is told of the substance of the charge against him/her and called upon to plead guilty or not guilty. Defendants rarely plead guilty at arraignment; however, in more than 90 percent of the cases the defendant pleads guilty or no contest prior to trial.

Cardinal Fang

If Z is claiming self-defense, he'll have to testify. It's undisputed that he shot Martin.

A witness can testify to what he himself heard Z say. That's not hearsay-- as to what Z said. Suppose I'm accused of robbing a 7-11. Afterwards I tell 07Dad I was at church, I tell NYMomof2 I was at the gym, I tell poetgrl I was home asleep. So then I testify in court that I didn't do it. The prosecution could bring 07Dad, NYMomof2 and poetgrl in to show that I lie a lot and therefore can't be believed, couldn't they?

07DAD

I went to the Florida Supreme Court website. For 2nd Degree, the information (pleading) has to state the lesser included offense for there to be an option for the jury to convict on thoses offenses.

Has anyone found the information (pleading) filed against Z? If manslaughter is not listed in the information, it may be murder 2 or nothing.

07DAD

It is correct that if person A says Z told them something relevant it will not be barred by hearsay. Note that my example was the witness crawfishing on where he had heard something.

It gets a little dicey if you are trying to show a propensity to lie by reference to some totally unrelated issues. Where it involves the direct facts/issues in the case, there usually is not a problem getting the conflicting statements in. The assertion is "you have said, X,Y and Z as the same fact--which is it?"

BCEagle91

I wonder if Z will get bail.

I heard an experienced prosecutor on the radio and he was a bit puzzled as to Corey's approach - similar to what has been said here. I have an article in another tab saying that the prosecution faces a lot of challenges.

07DAD

From what I found quickly.

Florida Bond Holds


Previous Felony Hold
In Florida, if the defendant has previously been convicted of a felony and the person's civil rights have not yet been restored, or if other felony charges are pending against the defendant a bail bond may be denied. In these cases, a criminal defense attorney may appeal the court's order to deny him or her a bail bond.

Serious Felony Hold

Some serious offenses, like first-degree murder, are deemed "non-bondable" and thus, a defendant is unable to bond out immediately. A Florida criminal defense lawyer must request what is referred to as an "Arthur Hearing." An Arthur Hearing is like a mini-trial whereby the state has the burden of proving that the person committed the crime and that the presumption of guilt is great.

I don't know if 2nd degree is nonbondable without a hearing. Getting bail set at an amount that can be bonded may in part be reflected in how Z and the new atty are behaving.

BCEagle91

The prosecutors must prove Zimmerman's shooting of Martin was rooted in hatred or ill will and counter his claims that he shot Martin to protect himself while patrolling his gated community in the Orlando suburb of Sanford. Zimmerman's lawyers would only have to prove by a preponderance of evidence — a relatively low legal standard — that he acted in self-defense at a pretrial hearing to prevent the case from going to trial.

There's a "high likelihood it could be dismissed by the judge even before the jury gets to hear the case," Florida defense attorney Richard Hornsby said.

The Associated Press: Prosecutors face hurdles in Trayvon Martin case